[제명처분취소등청구사건][고집1969특,296]
If a claim is modified, whether the provision on the period of filing a lawsuit shall be considered as a new claim.
On October 29, 1968, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the president of the Korea Mining Corporation and the president of the Korea Mining Trade Union's superior mining union of the same year against the president of the Korea Mining Corporation and the president of the Korea Mining Union of the same mining union of June 14 of the same year, and filed a lawsuit seeking the cancellation of dismissal order of the president of the branch office of the same year, and the defendant was corrected as the National Labor Relations Commission on April 29, 1969, and stated an application for correction of the purport of the claim against the corrected claim against the president of the above trade union of August 25 of the same year. According to Article 43 of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Commission Act, with respect to the decision of reexamination of the National Labor Relations Commission, the plaintiff shall file an administrative litigation within 15 days from the date of receipt of the written decision of reexamination. Thus, in this case where it is evident that the period of filing the above claim has been served on October 20, 1968.
Article 43 of the Trade Union Act
Plaintiff
National Labor Relations Commission
The action shall be dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
The plaintiff's attorney shall revoke the decision of retrial made by the defendant as subparagraph 8 of the mid-term Labor-Management Judgment of 1968 dated October 10, 1968.
The judgment that the litigation costs should be borne by the defendant was sought.
First of all, we will examine ex officio the accumulation of objection.
According to the records, with respect to the above commercial mining officers against the non-party Korea-China Mining Co., Ltd. and the above commercial mining officers against the non-party Korea-dong mining union chief on June 14, 1968 and with respect to the above commercial mining branch chief on Oct. 29, 1968, the head of the same branch filed a lawsuit seeking the cancellation of the dismissal order against the plaintiff as of Jun. 14, 1968, and with respect to the above commercial mining branch chief on Oct. 29, 1968, and filed the lawsuit on Oct. 29, 1968 and filed the lawsuit against the plaintiff as of Apr. 29, 1969. (The lawsuit against the defendant with respect to the same mining branch chief on Jun. 17, 1969 was withdrawn from the date for pleading mining union chief on May 26, 1967).
However, in light of the nature of each disposition that forms the original claim and the changed claim, even if the original claim and the changed claim are not changed on the basis of the claim, and it is assumed that the above defendant's correction is permitted, it is reasonable to deem that the change of the claim in the above case becomes an applicant to the extent that the change is modified, and in an appeal litigation, in an appeal litigation, the provision on the period for filing a lawsuit shall apply to the case. Therefore, the above change of claim in this lawsuit clearly is legitimate only when it is made within the period for filing a lawsuit set forth in
However, according to Article 43 of the Trade Union Act, the National Labor Relations Commission shall file an administrative litigation with respect to the decision on review of the case within 15 days from the date of receiving the notice of the decision on review of the case. Thus, in the case where the plaintiff is a person who is the plaintiff as to October 20, 1968, the change in the claim of this case was made after the lapse of the time limit as seen above, and therefore, it is clear that the claim against the defendant was made after the lapse of the time limit as mentioned above. Thus, it shall not be dismissed because it was illegal to comply with the time limit as to the claim of objection against the defendant.
Therefore, without making a decision on other issues, the plaintiff's lawsuit is dismissed, and the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiff who has lost, and it is so decided as per Disposition.
Judges Kim Jung-so (Presiding Judge)