부당해고구제재심판정취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.
The circumstances leading up to the decision of retrial are corporations that run broadcasting business on February 21, 1961. The Intervenor C, D, E, F, G (hereinafter the above Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s 16th session) and H were employed by the Intervenor I, J, K, L (hereinafter the above Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s 17th session referred to as “the Intervenor’s Intervenor,” and collectively referred to as “the Intervenor’s 16th session”) and M from 2017.
On January 2016, the Plaintiff publicly announced the employment of a new town including the following:
The plaintiff announced the same content in addition to the failure to state the screening schedule in advance.
1. Documents in the field of recruitment and screening procedures / 2 interview (final interview / prior interview) with the first interview (final interview) of the video screening camera test in the field of recruitment and screening procedures / (including final interview) and second interview with the second interview (final interview) : (a) report of the content of the services and research on the end of Korean programs, such as culture, etc., the period of contract: It may be changed according to the internal standards of A, such as an annual evaluation (which may be extended according to evaluation): 3. Receipt of written applications for a screening schedule: 00 on January 13, 2016 to January 27, 2016: 18: A person who passed the interview on February 14, 2016 (including preliminary interview / final interview : Preliminary interview) and each stage of time after the announcement on February 21, 2016 to February 21, 2016 and each stage of time after the announcement on February 21, 2016;
Around April 2016, the Plaintiff concluded a labor contract with the Intervenor and H on April 4, 2016, 16, which was selected through the aforementioned screening process, by setting the contract period from April 4, 2016 to April 3, 2017. Around April 3, 2017, the term of the contract was extended under the same conditions, except where the contract period was set by April 3, 2018.
The Plaintiff entered into a labor contract on May 2, 2017, setting the period of the 17th Intervenor and M&A and the contract period from May 22, 2017 to May 21, 2018.
The plaintiff.