2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3...

A. On April 1, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into an employment contract with the Defendant and carried out the production management work. On August 3, 2016, the Plaintiff was paid wages until he/she received notice from the Defendant to the effect that he/she would not work (hereinafter “instant dismissal”).

B. Since then, on November 16, 2016, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit, and the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of his reinstatement as of November 17, 2016. On November 25, 2016, the Plaintiff paid the unpaid wages to the Plaintiff by the said notification date. The Plaintiff did not return the unpaid wages to the present date.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the dismissal in this case was made orally in violation of Articles 23 and 27 of the Labor Standards Act, and sought confirmation of invalidity thereof without any justifiable reason, and sought payment of wages from the date of the instant dismissal to the date of reinstatement.

B. A lawsuit for confirmation of confirmation of confirmation of dismissal is permitted to eliminate risks and apprehensions with respect to current rights and legal status. A lawsuit for confirmation of confirmation of confirmation of dismissal also has the benefit of confirmation only where it is valid to obtain a judgment of confirmation of nullity of dismissal, which is merely a previous legal act, in order to restore the original status based on a labor contract or to eliminate existing risks or apprehensions with respect to the current rights and legal status arising from dismissal.

(See Supreme Court Decision 92Da20149 Decided January 15, 1993, and Supreme Court Decision 94Da4011 Decided April 11, 1995, etc.). However, according to the above facts, the defendant did not assert the validity of the dismissal of this case by recognizing the existence of an employment contract with the plaintiff and notifying the plaintiff of the reinstatement.