beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.06.30 2014가합1599

부당이득금반환 및 미지금임금 등

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a corporation established on May 9, 1989 pursuant to the National Sports Promotion Act for the commemoration of the Seoul Olympic Games and the promotion of national sports, and was granted permission for rectification by the Minister of Culture, Sports and Tourism pursuant to the Bicycle and Motorboat Racing Act (hereinafter “Act”).

B. Around December 200, the Plaintiff entered the corrective training center under the Defendant, received education and training, passed the qualification examination conducted by the Defendant, and thereafter registered the player. After concluding a contract with the Defendant for the corrective participation (hereinafter “instant corrective participation contract”), the Plaintiff participated in the corrective racing hosted by the Defendant while working as the corrective player from June 18, 2002 to November 29, 2009.

C. The Plaintiff received allowances and sexual prizes paid from the Defendant to the participating players by participating in the racing he applied for during the above period, based on the contract prior to the instant correction.

On November 28, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on the premise that he/she is an employee under the Labor Standards Act (Seoul Eastern District Court 2012Kadan116544), and was rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on November 12, 2013.

However, on September 19, 2014, the appellate court rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on the ground that the Plaintiff’s correction player, such as the Plaintiff, cannot be deemed an employee under the Labor Standards Act, and the said judgment became final and conclusive in the final appeal.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 3, 58, 61 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The judgment of this Court

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant corrective departure agreement constitutes an unfair legal act that was made by the Defendant, a racing business entity, abusing his exclusive position on the domestic date, and thus invalid.

The plaintiff is actually admitted to the corrective training center from July 200 to May 2002 as the defendant's employee.