해고무효확인
1. On the basis of the main claim changed from the trial court, the defendant's dismissal against the plaintiff on November 25, 2016.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation in this part of the underlying facts is as stated in the relevant part of the judgment of the first instance, except where the witness C is deemed as a witness C of the first instance trial. As such, this part of the judgment is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff asserts that the first and second dismissal measures of this case against the plaintiff are entirely null and void due to the following circumstances: ① the defendant's personnel regulations provide sufficient opportunity to explain to the plaintiff that the plaintiff should be present at the board of directors for a disciplinary resolution; ② the approval of the National Federation of Community Credit Cooperatives is required to dismiss the plaintiff with a standing position; ② the defendant did not obtain the approval of dismissal on November 25, 2016, without obtaining the board of directors' resolution on dismissal; ③ the defendant's dismissal measures against the plaintiff without obtaining the approval of dismissal on November 25, 2016, ③ the reason for dismissal against the plaintiff who is an employee under the Labor Standards Act, and the time of dismissal. However, there is a defect in violation of this provision.
In addition, the second dismissal of this case is a new disciplinary measure separate from the second dismissal of this case, and the second dismissal of this case does not provide the plaintiff with sufficient opportunity to provide the plaintiff with sufficient opportunity for explanation due to the defendant's personnel regulations not later than seven days before the decision is made.
B) The Plaintiff did not have grounds for disciplinary action as alleged by the Defendant, and even if there were grounds for disciplinary action, each of the instant dispositions is null and void because they exceeded the discretionary power. 2) The Defendant asserted that the Defendant’s dismissal disposition against the Plaintiff is valid on the following grounds.