부당해고구제재심판정취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the decision on retrial;
A. The Plaintiff is a company established on December 2, 1964, which ordinarily employs approximately 550 workers and runs the urban bus passenger transport business.
B. On March 9, 2016, the Intervenor joined the Plaintiff and served as an urban bus operator. On November 14, 2016, the Plaintiff opened a personnel committee and decided to revoke employment on the ground that “the Intervenor’s career and personal history of accidents are false” and notified the Intervenor of the revocation of employment on November 22, 2016.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant dismissal”). C.
On December 16, 2016, the Intervenor and the Seoul Metropolitan Government Bus Workers’ Union (hereinafter “instant trade union”) filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission on the ground that the instant dismissal constitutes unfair dismissal, disadvantageous treatment, unfair employment contracts, and unfair labor practices such as control and intervention.
The Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission accepted an application for remedy against unfair dismissal on February 13, 2017 on the ground that “the dismissal in this case constitutes an unfair dismissal in which it is difficult to recognize its justification,” but dismissed the application for remedy against unfair labor practices.
Seoul (Seoul 2016 only 2578/buno99). D.
On March 20, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for review with each National Labor Relations Commission for revocation of part of the first inquiry tribunal on March 20, 2017, and the Intervenor and the instant trade union, but the National Labor Relations Commission rendered a decision to dismiss all of the Plaintiff and intervenors for the same reason as the first inquiry tribunal on May 25, 2017.
(Central 2017 Annexed 252/Non-No36 consolidation, hereinafter referred to as “instant decision on reexamination”). [The grounds for recognition] of absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 13 (which include each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the entire pleadings.
2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion is the plaintiff's bus.