손해배상(기)
1. The judgment of the first instance, including a claim for exchange change and a claim for extension in this court, is as follows.
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant is a company that aims at the taxi transport business, and the Plaintiff is a person who joined the Defendant company on November 14, 2014 and works as a taxi driver.
B. The Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff on June 13, 2016, following the resolution of the disciplinary committee, on the ground that “the Plaintiff intentionally slandered or spreads the company, refused normal business instructions, or assault and abusive language to his/her superior, conducted business outside the hours of time of the business, violated the Road Traffic Act, engaged in an unlawful labor campaign, instigates to do so, and engaged in other business than the taxi business on the working day, and thereby constitutes the grounds for disciplinary action specified in the collective agreement.”
(hereinafter referred to as "first dismissal"). (c)
On the other hand, the Plaintiff made a request for unfair dismissal to the Gangwon Regional Labor Relations Commission (hereinafter “Labor Relations Commission”), and on August 24, 2016, the Labor Relations Commission ruled that “The first dismissal constitutes unfair dismissal and thus, the Plaintiff is reinstated and the amount equivalent to the wages during the period of dismissal is paid.”
[Gangwon 2016 only 132/buno20 (combined)] D.
The Defendant reinstated the Plaintiff on October 1, 2016 according to the foregoing ruling, and deposited KRW 2,716,583 in the Chuncheon District Court on October 14, 2016, the sum of the paid-in and annual allowances of KRW 2,354,783 during the first dismissal period and KRW 361,80 during the first dismissal period with the deposited person as the Plaintiff.
(Court 2016No. 1419). e.
After that, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff on December 15, 2016, following the resolution of the disciplinary committee, on the ground that “the Plaintiff was sentenced to a fine or heavier punishment by the judgment of the court, and committed an act falling under the grounds for disciplinary action specified in the collective agreement by refusing to take normal business instructions or assaulting or verbal abuse against the company.”
(hereinafter referred to as “the second dismissal”). In this regard, the Plaintiff filed an application for unfair dismissal with the Labor Relations Commission, and the Labor Relations Commission on February 2, 2017 constitutes an unfair dismissal, and thus, the Plaintiff constitutes an unfair dismissal.