부당해고구제재심판정취소
1. On January 20, 2015, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered relief for unfair dismissal between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor.
The plaintiff is a government-invested corporation that carries out businesses such as railroad passengers and freight transportation, rolling stock maintenance, etc. using approximately 28,000 regular workers, and has 12 regional headquarters such as Seoul Headquarters, 3 rolling stock maintenance teams and affiliated agencies, etc., and each regional headquarters belongs to the main office.
The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) is a person who was on December 10, 1991, who was employed as a branch of the Seoul Regional Railroad Service and was in charge of the duties such as the safety, driving, and accident of customers on board the train team at the seat of the D Office from March 25, 2005 to the head of the train team at the D Office, etc. on September 29, 199, through the Seoul Railway Office C, etc. of the Seoul Railway Office; and on April 22, 2004, he was in charge of the duties such as taking measures for safety, driving, and accident of customers; and the overall direction of the train in the train.
On May 30, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) around 15:20 on January 16, 2014, at the time of the Intervenor’s retirement from the air, stolen the wallets, bags, etc. of the passengers set on the front line using a stolen debit card; and (b) purchased the 1 foot 1 heading using a stolen debit card; (c) around 20:00 on January 17, 2014, at the time of the Intervenor’s attendance, the Plaintiff took advantage of the gap in viewing the IMB’s broadcasts to the mobile phone, that the Intervenor stolen the wallets, bags, etc. of the passengers set on the front line (hereinafter “instant misconduct”) by holding a resolution of the Disciplinary Committee on the grounds that the grounds for the instant misconduct is good faith, Article 6(a) of the Rules of Employment, Article 8(Prohibition Act), Article 32(3) of the Personnel Affairs Regulation, and Article 316(3) of the Code of Conduct, and that the Intervenor’s duty to dismiss the Intervenor’s employees and employees.
(hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”). On June 23, 2014, an intervenor filed a petition for review with the Plaintiff Disciplinary Review Committee on the instant disciplinary action or dismissal, but dismissed on August 21, 2014, the Intervenor on August 28, 2014.