노동조합및노동관계조정법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Jeonju District Court Panel Division.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. The summary of the facts charged in this case is as follows.
A. The Defendant, as the representative director of a limited company E (hereinafter “E”), is an employer who engages in passenger transport service as a bus user.
(b) An employer shall not refuse or neglect, without any justifiable reason, the conclusion of an agreement with the representative of a trade union or a person delegated by a trade union on an organization or other organizations;
However, in order to enter into an organization agreement in 201 with F Headquarters G of the National Public Transport Service Workers’ Union (hereinafter “Public Transport Service Workers’ Union”) under the Democratic Nowon General, the Defendant rejected the collective bargaining on the working conditions 33 times in total from April 3, 2012 to November 9, 2012 (1) and (2) from November 16, 2012 to February 18, 2013, even if the Defendant was requested to negotiate an organization on the working conditions 49 times in total, without justifiable grounds.
(c)
An employer shall be prohibited from awarding a contract or subcontracting for the affairs interrupted by the acts of dispute during the period of such dispute.
However, the Defendant participated in the strike from March 13, 2012 to July 2, 2012 by 18 persons, including I, who are members of the branch of the North Korea branch E (hereinafter “the instant labor union”) before the headquarters for public transportation labor unions and who work in the maintenance position of E, and the maintenance work of E was suspended due to the act of dispute during that period, the Defendant contracted the maintenance work suspended by three maintenance business entities from March 28, 2012 to May 23, 2012.
2. Determination as to the violation of the Trade Union Act and the Labor Relations Adjustment Act due to the refusal of collective bargaining (hereinafter “Labor Union Act”).
A. In a criminal trial, the finding of guilt must be based on evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt.
If the prosecutor's proof does not reach such a level that it would lead to conviction, even if there is suspicion of guilt, it is the benefit of the defendant.