beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.12.20 2019누53824

부당해고구제재심판정취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part arising from the supplementary participation.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, citing the instant case, is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following parts and the part concerning which the plaintiff emphasized at the court of first instance or claimed an additional claim, and thus, citing this in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(2) In addition, the court below’s findings of fact and determination that rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion are justifiable even if the Plaintiff’s assertion was examined as to all the evidence submitted in the court of first instance and the court of first instance, and the content alleged by the Plaintiff is not significantly different from the contents alleged by the Plaintiff in the court of first instance. [The part to be examined] If the court of first instance 2, 9 of the court of first instance, the court below’s determination of fact and determination is justifiable.

Part 2 of the judgment of the first instance, part 17 through 18 "D (hereinafter referred to as "D")" is "D."

[Supplementary part] The plaintiff was employed as a youth for insurance sales in D, which is engaged in insurance agency business, and E, who was concurrently engaged in the representative director of D and the intervenor company, had terminated the plaintiff's labor relations in D without the plaintiff's consent and forced the intervenor company that cannot sell the insurance for its business purpose by modifying the terms and conditions of employment. Accordingly, the intervenor company asserted that the intervenor company was engaged in unfair job transfer to dismiss the plaintiff.

However, as seen earlier, the Plaintiff: (a) reported the interview from D’s inside directors G to take charge of the interference with insurance business in D; and (b) retired from D around November 20, 2017; (c) met with E on November 22, 2017, submitted a resume to the Intervenor company; (d) provided that the Intervenor company shall be in charge of the interference with the business; (e) set the basic salary as KRW 1,500,000; and (e) further discussed the specific working conditions, such as other incentives, such as other incentives; and (b)