beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2011.05.19 2010누14192

단체협약시정명령취소

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff falling under the corrective order that orders cancellation below shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 12, 2007, the Plaintiff is a public official labor union, the establishment of which was reported pursuant to the Act on the Establishment, Operation, etc. of Public Officials’ Labor Unions (amended by Act No. 10133, Mar. 17, 2010; hereinafter “Public Officials’ Labor Unions Act”).

B. On December 28, 2007, the Young-gu branch of the Busan Regional Headquarters under the Plaintiff concluded a collective agreement between the head of the Gu of Young-do Busan Metropolitan City and the head of the Gu of Young-gu, Busan Metropolitan City, and the head of the Gu.

C. The Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission requested the Defendant to examine the illegality of the collective agreement at issue, and passed a resolution on July 16, 2009 as to the part of the collective agreement, including the provisions stated in the attached Form 1 “Article 31(3) of the Trade Union Act, on which the Defendant issued a corrective order as to the part of the agreement, including the provisions stated in the attached Table 1 “Article 31(3) of the Trade Union Act, on the ground that the reasons in the attached Form 1 “the Defendant’s corrective order” was stated in the attached Table 1, such as ① violation of Article 10(1) of the Public Officials Labor Relations Adjustment Act, ② violation of Article 8(1) of the Public Officials Labor Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act, ③ violation of Article

(hereinafter “instant corrective order”). 【No dispute over the ground for recognition】 【No dispute over the instant corrective order, and entry in Gap evidence 2-1, 2, 3, 4, and Eul evidence 1

2. Whether the corrective order of this case is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant corrective order regarding the provision in Attachment 1 of the Plaintiff’s argument is unlawful for the following reasons, and thus, should be revoked.

(1) The provisions and regulations of the head of the Gu and the market established without delegation of the Acts and subordinate statutes and municipal ordinances, which are contrary to Article 10(1) of the Public Officials' Labor Union Act, are merely rules of employment, and thus, the agreement different from those of the above rules and regulations of the collective agreement is recognized pursuant to Article 33(1) of the Trade Union Act. The agreement different from those of the head of the Gu and the market established with delegation of the Acts and subordinate statutes