고용보험수급자격불인정처분 취소
1. On August 5, 2014, the Defendant’s disposition of non-approval of eligibility for employment insurance against the Plaintiff is revoked.
2...
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff joined the Korea Railroad Corporation and worked at the Busan Gyeongnam Headquarters or the Busan rolling stock maintenance team (a trade union established with the organization of workers engaged in the Korea Railroad Corporation and the railroad industry, which has approximately 20,000 members and five members of the regional headquarters of Seoul, Daejeon, Youngju, Honam, and Busan rolling stock; hereinafter “B”).
B. On June 26, 2013, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport established and announced a plan for development of the railroad industry, the main frame of which is “the structure of the railroad construction (the passenger sector) and its subsidiary structure, and the KTX, which is opened in 2015, shall invest 30% of the Railroad Corporation and 70% of the public funds, and shall be a subsidiary holding the right of management, and shall adopt a competition system between Seoul and TTX.” The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport established and announced a plan for development of the railroad industry, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport conducted the strike from December 9, 2013 to December 31, 2013 (hereinafter “instant strike”). The Plaintiff, who was the head of the Busan Local Headquarters, led the members of the central countermeasure committee to deliberate and resolve on the strategy and the direction of the strike in accordance with the plan, etc., and led them to various industrial actions by participating in the central countermeasure committee.
C. On February 28, 2014, the Korea Railroad Corporation, upon the completion of the instant strike, held a disciplinary committee against the Plaintiff, and passed a resolution on disciplinary dismissal (hereinafter “instant dismissal”) on the ground that “the Plaintiff planned, attempted, and instigated the instant strike in the position of the Chairperson, etc. of C, etc. to interfere with the instant strike.”
Then, on July 23, 2014, the Plaintiff recognized the Defendant’s eligibility for employment insurance benefits on the ground that “the Defendant was subject to disciplinary action following the participation in the strike.”