(영문) 서울고등법원 2012. 2. 9. 선고 2011누31828 판결[시정명령취소][미간행]
Korea Airports Corporation (Attorney Kim Young-deok, Counsel for defendant-appellant)
The Head of Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Office Seoul Southern Site
January 19, 2012
Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2011Guhap5469 decided September 2, 2011
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the defendant revoked the resolution of the trade union and the corrective order against the plaintiff on December 3, 2010.
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
The reason why this Court is to use for the instant case is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for adding the following judgments, and thus, the same is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional determination
The plaintiff asserts that Article 16 of the rules of the plaintiff clearly violates the purport of Article 16 of the above rules to interpret that the general meeting cannot resolve the matters stipulated in the rules as the resolution of the representatives' meeting.
On the other hand, the rules of a trade union shall have the legal effect as an autonomous legal norm, and Article 17(1) of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act provides that a trade union may have a board of representatives to “constition” at a general meeting under the rules. Accordingly, as long as the rules of the plaintiff clearly separates the matters to be resolved at a general meeting and the matters to be resolved at a representatives meeting from the general meeting, the matters to be resolved at a representative meeting in the case of the plaintiff shall be deemed not to exercise the status and authority of the general meeting in favor of the general meeting, but to exercise all the status and authority in lieu of the general meeting, even if the general meeting is the highest resolution body of the plaintiff, it shall not be permitted against the rules of the plaintiff to make a direct resolution of the representative meeting.
Therefore, in a case where the defendant recognizes that a resolution or disposition by the labor union violates the labor-related Acts and subordinate statutes or regulations, it is legitimate to order the plaintiff to correct the violation pursuant to Article 21(2) of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act, which stipulates that the order to correct the violation shall be obtained by the resolution of the Labor Relations Commission. Therefore,
3. Conclusion
Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the plaintiff's appeal.
Judges Yan Jung-hun (Presiding Judge)