부당해고 및 부당정직구제 재심판정 취소청구의 소
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
All costs of litigation, including costs incurred in relation to participation, shall be borne by the plaintiff.
1. The background of the decision on the retrial of this case
A. The Plaintiff was established on December 27, 2013, and is a corporation that runs the railroad transport business through STRT (former trade name and high-speed railroad company). The intervenors are dispatched to the Plaintiff while serving in the Korea Railroad Corporation and were on dispatch service, and the Intervenor’s dispatch service period between January 10 and January 4, 2015 is the period between January 10, 2014 and January 31, 2015, respectively. < Amended by Act No. 12173, Jan. 10, 2014; Act No. 13183, Dec. 31, 2015>
The Intervenor A was employed on January 5, 2015 by open employment, and the Intervenor B and C were employed on January 4, 2016 by special employment.
The Intervenor C was the head of the E Department (Management Grade 2), the Intervenor A was the F leader of the E Department F team (Business Affairs Class 3), and the Intervenor B was the F director of the E Department (Business Affairs Class 4), and the Intervenor B was the Plaintiff respectively.
B. A disciplinary committee was held on April 27, 2017 by the Intervenor, and the said disciplinary committee called “the grounds for the instant disciplinary action” as set out in attached Table 1 (hereinafter referred to as “the grounds for the instant disciplinary action”), and decided to dismiss the Intervenor A and C, and to suspend the Intervenor B from office for six months for the Intervenor B, respectively, and the Plaintiff notified each of the above disciplinary measures on April 28, 2017.
On May 10, 2017, the intervenors filed a petition for review with the Plaintiff on May 10, 2017, and on May 23, 2017, the Plaintiff held a new disciplinary committee and dismissed all of the intervenors’ requests for review (hereinafter “each of the instant disciplinary actions”).
The Intervenor asserted that each of the instant disciplinary actions constitutes unfair dismissal or unfair suspension, and filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission.
The Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission decided on September 29, 2017 that the disciplinary action of the instant case was unfair on the basis that the grounds for the disciplinary action of the instant case, which was part of the grounds for the disciplinary action of the instant case, was recognized, but the determination was excessive.
(d)
The plaintiff was dissatisfied with the above first instance judgment and applied for review to the National Labor Relations Commission.
The National Labor Relations Commission shall on January 2018.