임금
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On March 8, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a labor contract with the council of occupants’ representatives with Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B apartment (hereinafter “B apartment”) on the condition that the contract period from March 8, 2013 to June 30, 2013, the Plaintiff would serve as security guards in B apartment.
B. The Defendant is a company that ordinarily employs more than 360 workers to run security service business, etc.
On May 15, 2013, the defendant entered into a contract with B apartment council of occupants' representatives with the content that the contract period from June 1, 2013 to May 31, 2015, and that the defendant would carry out the guard work of B apartment.
According to the above contract of contract, the defendant agreed with the B apartment council of occupants' representatives to succeed to the employment of the security guards who worked in B apartment at the time of signing the contract.
C. Around June 1, 2013, the Defendant entered into a new employment contract with 40 security guards (hereinafter “40 security guards, including the Plaintiff, etc.”) who worked in B apartment at the time, including the Plaintiff.
According to the former employment contract, the term of a contract was from June 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013, and was included in the content that “a contract shall be renewed one month prior to the expiration of the employment contract and shall be deemed terminated if there is no renewal contract.”
(hereinafter referred to as the “instant labor contract”) between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is D.
On November 2013, the Defendant created a document stating that “work contract with workers who entered into an employment contract with the B apartment council of occupants’ representatives expires on December 31, 2013, and later, when concluding a renewal contract with the Defendant, the Defendant may restrict the retirement age of those qualified to work due to lack of work ability, attitude of work, health conditions, etc., or those on the apartment side or on the apartment side who requested replacement of the number of employees may not extend the working contract.”
The defendant around that time shall submit the above documents to 40 persons including the plaintiff, etc.