부당해고및부당노동행위구제재심판정취소등
1. Plaintiff A, B, C, D, which orders the following dismissal or cancellation of the portion of unfair suspension from office in the first instance judgment:
1. Details of the decision on retrial;
A. The Plaintiffs, (i) are the parties, while entering the Intervenor at each date listed in the separate entry date as indicated in the separate entry date as indicated in the separate entry date, who is an executive officer or member of the AB Trade Union (hereinafter “AB Trade Union”) or the ABAB M&C branch (hereinafter “AC branch”) affiliated with the AC branch (hereinafter “AC branch”) who is subject to three months of dismissal or suspension from office from the Intervenor on July 26, 2010 and July 29, 2010, as described in the separate disciplinary type No. 1 column.
Dor intervenor is a company that manufactures automobile parts by using 880 full-time workers at the above address and supplies them to complete companies such as Hyundai Motor Co., Ltd.
B. (1) On October 4, 2010, the Gyeongbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission accepted an application for remedy against unfair disciplinary action against Plaintiff D, E, and K from the Plaintiffs, and made an initial inquiry court to dismiss the remainder of the Plaintiffs’ application for remedy against unfair disciplinary action and the Plaintiffs’ application for remedy against unfair labor practice.
AD and AE, which were members of the National Labor Relations Commission, were subject to three months of suspension from office, and were cited by the request for unfair disciplinary action with the plaintiffs. The intervenor appealeded to the National Labor Relations Commission, but was dismissed. After which the intervenor filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the review decision with the Seoul Administrative Court 201Guhap6233, the intervenor was dismissed, and the decision of dismissal was finally affirmed in the appellate court (Seoul High Court 2012Nu4038) and the final appeal (Supreme Court 2012Du26173).
B. On January 10, 201, the National Labor Relations Commission of Korea accepted the part of the Intervenor’s request for reexamination against Plaintiff D, E, and K on January 10, 201, revoked the initial inquiry court and dismissed the request for unfair disciplinary action against Plaintiff D, E, and K, and rendered the instant reexamination decision that dismissed the Plaintiffs’ request for reexamination.
[Reasons for Recognition] Gap evidence 1 and Eul evidence 3, respectively.