부당해고기각취소
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 grounds for the decision on retrial asserted that the Plaintiff was employed on May 20, 2016 by the Intervenor and was dismissed on May 21, 2016, and that the Plaintiff filed an application for remedy with the Gyeongbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission on May 23, 2016, and the Gyeongbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission rejected the application for remedy on July 13, 2016, on the ground that the relationship between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor was not established.
(Seoul High Court Decision 2016No. 284). On August 25, 2016, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the initial inquiry court, filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission on August 25, 2016, and the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination on the same ground as the initial inquiry court on November 28, 201
(중앙2016부해960, 이하 ‘이 사건 재심판정’이라 한다). [인정근거] 다툼 없는 사실, 갑 제1, 2호증의 각 기재, 변론 전체의 취지 이 사건 재심판정의 적법 여부 원고의 주장 원고는 2016. 5. 20. 10:00경 참가인 회사 상무인 D과 통화하면서 급여조건 등을 합의한 다음 D로부터 채용 결정을 받았고, 같은 날 16:00경 참가인 회사에 출근하여 참가인 회사 기숙사에서 하룻밤을 보냈으므로, 원고와 참가인 사이에는 근로관계가 성립되었다.
However, the Intervenor dismissed the Plaintiff on May 21, 2016 without justifiable reasons, which constitutes an unfair dismissal.
Judgment
앞서 든 증거들과 을가 제1 내지 3호증의 각 기재에 의하면, 원고는 2016. 5. 20. 10:00경 참가인 회사 상무 D과 통화한 사실, 원고는 같은 날 16:00경 참가인 회사를 찾아가 참가인 회사 기숙사에서 하룻밤을 보낸 사실은 인정된다.
However, in light of the following circumstances, the above evidence and the evidence evidence Nos. 2 through 5 revealed the overall purport of the pleadings, it is insufficient to recognize that the relationship between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor was established, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.