부당해고구제재심판정취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation.
The reasons and contents of the review decision are about 60 full-time workers, and the plaintiff is an organization that carries on business to enhance the honor, enhance the welfare, and enhance the rights and interests of persons of distinguished service in the Vietnam War, and is engaged in book publishing business and distribution business.
On July 15, 2014, the intervenor entered the plaintiff and took charge of the management of the website and the preparation of a speech.
On July 14, 2018, the Plaintiff notified the Intervenor of the termination of the employment contract on the ground that the term of the employment contract expires.
(hereinafter “instant notification”). On July 18, 2018, the Intervenor filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission by asserting that “the instant notification constitutes unfair dismissal.”
On September 14, 2018, Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission accepted the Intervenor’s request for remedy on the ground that “The Plaintiff’s refusal to renew the labor contract without reasonable grounds is unjust.”
On October 23, 2018, the Plaintiff appealed and filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission.
On January 22, 2019, the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the plaintiff's application for reexamination on the same ground as the initial inquiry tribunal.
(2) The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the instant decision on reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of this case (hereinafter “instant decision on reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of this case”) is without dispute. (3) The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the instant decision on reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of this case is without the right to expect the renewal
Even if the intervenor's right to renew the contract is recognized, the intervenor's attitude to perform his/her duties is passive and not limited to his/her employees, so there is a reasonable reason to refuse the renewal of the contract by the plaintiff.
In the case of an employee who has entered into a labor contract within a fixed period of time as to whether the right to renew is recognized, the status of the employee shall expire.