A first-instance court ruled that if a new employee who was late for three consecutive days starting on the first day of work died in a car crash on the fourth day while driving to work, it should be recognized as an occupational accident.
On the 22nd, the 4th Division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Kim Young-min) said it ruled for the plaintiff in a suit filed by the bereaved family of Worker A against the Korea Workers' Compensation & Welfare Service (K-COMWEL) seeking to overturn a decision not to pay survivors' benefits and funeral expenses.
A joined an auto repair shop in Jan. 2023. However, A was late for three consecutive days starting on the first day of work. Then, at about 6:50 a.m. on the fourth day, A crashed into a utility pole while driving a car toward the workplace and died.
The family said, "Our son was in an accident on the way to work," and filed a claim with the Korea Workers' Compensation & Welfare Service (K-COMWEL) for survivors' benefits and funeral expenses.
But the agency said it could not pay survivors' benefits or funeral expenses. The agency said, "Although the crash site was on A's commuting route, the time of the accident was much earlier than the usual work start time," and noted, "It cannot be seen that A was driving for the purpose of commuting."
The agency also said, "Before joining the repair shop, A had a side job collecting scrap metal and waste paper, and a considerable amount of waste paper was found in the car involved in the accident," adding, "A was likely on the way to do the side job at the time of the crash."
However, the court did not accept the agency's claims. The court said, "It takes about 53 minutes to travel from A's home to the repair shop, and if the accident had not occurred, A would have arrived at the shop around 7:40 a.m.," adding, "Because the company's designated start time is 8 a.m. and A had been late for the past three days, it is reasonable to view that the fatal accident occurred on the way to work."
The court went on to say, "There are no objective circumstances to conclude that A was traveling for the side job at the time of the accident," determining that "the agency's claim is merely speculative."