부당해고구제재심판정취소
1. The request for retrial of this case is dismissed.
2. The cost of review shall include the part resulting from the intervention.
The following facts are either a dispute between the parties to a judgment subject to review, or are apparent in records.
On December 31, 2013, the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) entered and served in the Intervenor’s Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) that is a company engaging in the manufacture, sale, etc. of automobiles, and received each retirement notice (hereinafter “instant personnel notice”) pursuant to Article 30 subparag. 1 of the Rules of Employment of Executive Members, which was enacted to be subject to the application of at least the director of general service, at least the number of researchers in research service, at least the number of researchers in research service, and at least the number of employees in production service (hereinafter “inter-members”) from the Intervenor.
Meanwhile, the Intervenor has the branch E of the F Trade Union (hereinafter “Nonindicted Trade Union”) and the F Trade Union G Branch (hereinafter “instant trade union”). The Plaintiffs joined the instant trade union between March and May 2013.
Plaintiff
A, C, and D applied for remedy against unfair dismissal to the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission on March 10, 2014, and applied for remedy against unfair labor practices on March 24, 2014, but the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed each of the above requests on May 15, 2014.
Plaintiff
B applied for remedy against unfair dismissal to the Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission on March 10, 2014, and applied for remedy against unfair labor practices on March 24, 2014, but the Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the respective request for remedy from Plaintiff B on June 9, 2014.
Plaintiff
A, C, and D filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission on June 2, 2014; and on July 2, 2014, the Plaintiff B filed an application for reexamination to the National Labor Relations Commission; however, the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the application for reexamination on August 8, 2014.
(hereinafter “instant decision on reexamination.” The Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the Defendant (the Defendant; hereinafter “Defendant”) seeking the revocation of the instant decision on reexamination by the Seoul Administrative Court 2014Guhap16170, and the Seoul Administrative Court, the first instance court, retired on October 22, 2015.