The employee fell during the group construction organized by the company, so he applied for the identification of industrial injury. After review by the Human Resources and Social Security Bureau, he believed that Mr. Zhu's fall had nothing to do with work and was not recognized as industrial injury. If the employee is not satisfied, the Human Resources and Social Security Bureau will be sued to the court to request the cancellation of the decision of the People's Insurance Bureau not to recognize the industrial injury. After hearing, the People's Court of Haidian District of Beijing Municipality decided to revoke the decision of the People's Insurance Bureau not to recognize the industrial injury and ordered it to re-process Mr. Zhu's application for industrial injury recognition within the statutory time limit. The Plaintiff, Mr. Zhu, claimed that the Plaintiff's employing unit organized its employees to go out to visit a scenic spot. Accidental fall during the visit resulted in fracture of the right foot. However, the defendant considered that the plaintiff's injury was not at work, not at work and had nothing to do with work, and made a decision not to recognize the industrial injury. However, this activity is an annual work arrangement that the company has continued for many years to enhance the cohesion of the team, and all external expenses are borne by the company. The plaintiff's injured day is Friday, which is a normal working day, and the attendance and wages are normally recorded, which can indicate that this trip belongs to the continuation of working hours and positions, and should be recognized as industrial injury. Therefore, the above lawsuit is filed. The defendant's Insurance Bureau argued that the defendant's decision not to recognize the industrial injury was clear, the applicable laws and regulations were correct, and the procedure was legal. Mr. Zhu was injured during participating in the welfare tourism activities organized by the unit. The injury occurred during the play was not in the working hours, the working position and had nothing to do with the work, so it did not conform to the situation of industrial injury recognized in Article 14 of the Regulations on Industrial Injury Insurance, so it could not be recognized as industrial injury. After hearing, the court held that, according to the provisions of Item 5 of Article 14 of the Regulations on Industrial Injury Insurance, if the employee is injured due to work during his/her absence from work, he/she should be recognized as industrial injury. In this case, Mr. Zhu visited Gubei Water Town scenic spot according to the company's activities. The activity is organized and funded by the company and is a welfare treatment for employees. The activity itself does not exist independently of the status of employees. Therefore, the above activities are intrinsically related to work and are a normal work arrangement of the company. Therefore, Mr. Zhu's participation in the above activities is due to work. At the same time, Mr. Zhu was injured in the scenic area of Gubeishui Town, not in other activities that he participated in by himself in violation of the company's arrangement. Mr. Zhu was injured in the scenic spot because of work. To sum up, Mr. Zhu was injured while participating in the above activities, which belongs to the situation that he was injured due to work reasons when he was out of work as stipulated in the Regulations on Industrial Injury Insurance, and also conforms to the industrial injury identification and industrial injury insurance principles established in the Regulations on Industrial Injury Insurance to ensure that he received medical treatment and economic compensation for accident injuries caused by work and promote industrial injury prevention and occupational rehabilitation. Therefore, in the decision of not recognizing industrial injury, the PICC found that the injury caused by Mr. Zhu in the above-mentioned activities organized by the company did not conform to the industrial injury recognition situation stipulated in Article 14 of the Industrial Injury Insurance Regulations, and the conclusion of not recognizing industrial injury was an error of applicable law, which should be corrected by the court. Therefore, the decision made by the Defendant's Insurance Bureau not to recognize the industrial injury was rescinded, and it was ordered to re-process Mr. Zhu's application for industrial injury recognition within the legal period after this judgment came into effect. After the judgment, neither party has