beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.01.14 2014노1597

업무방해등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A A Fines of 1,00,000 won, Defendant B, C, D, F, and G are punished by each fine of 50,000 won.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles workers were allowed to freely leave their work at night when it is difficult for them to engage in overtime work (hereinafter referred to as "cruel work"), and they did not engage in the remaining work at night. The rules of employment also stipulate that employees’ consent should be obtained in order to engage in the remaining work. Accordingly, K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "K") also investigated employees into whether to engage in the remaining work every day. Although it is difficult to view such remaining work and holiday work (hereinafter referred to as "special work"), it is merely a non-performance of civil obligation and is not subject to criminal punishment.

Defendant

F, E, and G are not elected as trade union executives at an extraordinary general meeting for the establishment of the Chungcheongnam-nam Branch of the Korean Metal Trade Union (hereinafter referred to as the “K branch”) around March 8, 2008, and the Defendants were not the establishment of the company, but the establishment of the company was reported by the Defendants around March 10, 2008.

As indicated in the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendants resolved to instruct union members to collectively refuse to engage in the remaining business and special circumstances, and did not encourage them to refuse to engage in the remaining business and special circumstances. Rather, as K branch was established, the Defendants did not provide union members with alternative human resources, such as Chinese workers, and given them an opportunity to engage in the remaining business and special circumstances.

On April 4, 2008, K sent to K Branch a letter of public order on April 1, 2008, “The case of urging to prevent the recurrence of collective refusal of holiday work,” and on April 11, 2008, “the case of urging to prevent the recurrence of overtime work and holiday work refusal,” but this is merely a matter of public order for K Branch’s executives to engage in trade union activities without remaining work or special circumstances, and the members of K Branch’s association engage in remaining work.