부당징계구제재심판정취소
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.
1. Details of the decision on retrial;
A. The Intervenor is a company established on December 14, 198, and engaged in manufacturing business, such as automobile parts, with the head office and sub-factory in Bupyeong-si, Seocheon-si, the head office and sub-factory in the Chungcheongbuk-gun, and the defendant ordinarily employs more than 30 workers.
On November 23, 2000, the Plaintiff was enrolled in the Intervenor and served in the Bupyeong-do Factory, and was transferred on July 4, 201, and served as the head of the production management division in the original factory.
In the gate plant, there was a process of assembling the strawer for the vehicle, and in detail, the strawer was inserted into the frame of the strawer for the vehicle supplied by the subcontractor to automatically connect the strawer for the vehicle supplied by the subcontractor, and the operation of V was carried out.
B. On October 24, 2013 and November 15, 2013, and January 10, 2014, the Intervenor held a disciplinary committee against the Plaintiff on three occasions.
The plaintiff was present at the first and second disciplinary committee among the above three occasions, and the third disciplinary committee passed a resolution on disciplinary action against the plaintiff.
The Intervenor’s Disciplinary Committee’s disciplinary decision was based on the foregoing: “The Plaintiff failed to report the validity evaluation of the correction of the framework of the Crhler’s 4M (referring to “4M, human resources, raw materials, equipment, and method of production,” referring to “the Plaintiff’s failure to perform quality control duties,” and caused a company’s loss as a result of large-scale malfunction due to a large-scale defect due to an operation less than V, around June 2013 (hereinafter “instant ground for disciplinary action 1”); and “the Plaintiff is a company having its head office in Cheongjin-gu, and factory in the Chungcheongbuk-gun; hereinafter “Sttex”) supplied by the Intervenor on June 21, 2013.” The Intervenor did not visit the Intervenor by promising the Plaintiff to resolve the problem by failing to make a visit on June 22, 2013.