[해고무효확인등][공1997.8.1.(39),2174]
Whether it is against the collective agreement to dismiss an employee by determining a new ground for dismissal which is not related to the grounds for dismissal under the collective agreement with the rules of employment.
Except as otherwise expressly provided for in the collective agreement to the effect that "in respect of dismissal, and shall be subject to the collective agreement and shall not be dismissed under the rules of employment," or that "workers shall not be dismissed for any reason other than that provided for in the collective agreement", the grounds for dismissal and procedures for dismissal shall be subject to the collective agreement in the dismissal of workers, or unless the provisions of the collective agreement and the rules of employment conflict with each other with respect to the same grounds for dismissal or disciplinary procedure, the employer shall not be in violation of the collective agreement to determine new grounds for dismissal which are not related to the grounds for dismissal provided for in the collective agreement in
Articles 27(1) and 97(1) of the former Labor Standards Act (amended by Act No. 5305 of March 13, 1997); Article 36(1) of the former Trade Union Act (amended by Act No. 5244 of December 31, 1996)
Supreme Court Decision 94Da37851 Decided January 20, 1995 (Gong1995Sang, 1974) Supreme Court Decision 94Da30249 Decided April 7, 1995 (Gong1995Sang, 1821) Decided June 14, 1994 (Gong195Sang, 1821)
Plaintiff 1 and three others (Law Firm citizen's General Law Office, Attorneys Yoon Jong-tae et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)
Young Life Insurance Co., Ltd. (formerly: Korean Education Insurance Co., Ltd.) (Attorney Lee Jae-soo et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)
Seoul High Court Decision 95Na7293 delivered on January 31, 1997
All appeals are dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.
We examine the grounds of appeal.
Unless the collective agreement explicitly provides for the purport that "any dismissal shall be made in accordance with the collective agreement and shall not be dismissed under the rules of employment," or that "any dismissal shall not be made for any reason other than that provided for in the collective agreement" or that "any dismissal of workers shall be made in the collective agreement," or that the employer shall not dismiss workers in accordance with the rules of employment for determining new grounds not related to the grounds for dismissal provided for in the collective agreement and the rules of employment for the same reason or disciplinary procedure, unless the provisions of the collective agreement and the rules of employment conflict with each other with respect to the same reason for dismissal and disciplinary procedure, the employer shall not be in violation of the collective agreement (see Supreme Court Decisions 93Nu2015 delivered on June 14, 1994, 94Da37851 delivered on January 20, 1995, 94Da30249 delivered on April 7, 1995).
The court below determined that Article 31 of the collective agreement provides that the grounds for disciplinary dismissal under Article 31 of the collective agreement between the defendant and his employees shall be limited to 12 members, but Article 27 of the collective agreement provides that the labor union shall belong to the company, including disciplinary dismissal, and Article 32 provides that disciplinary dismissal shall include disciplinary dismissal, and Article 33 provides that the employment rules which are the defendant's employment rules shall classify the dismissal of members into dismissal from office, retirement age, dismissal from office, dismissal from office, dismissal from office, disciplinary dismissal, and Article 9, Article 73 provides that disciplinary punishment for members shall be followed, and that Article 21 of the above provision provides that disciplinary dismissal shall be punished by disciplinary dismissal, suspension from office, reduction, and reprimand, and that Article 31 of the collective agreement shall not be punished by disciplinary dismissal, and that Article 31 of the collective agreement shall not be punished by disciplinary dismissal in addition to the above provisions, the court below's decision that "the grounds for dismissal from office under Article 31 of the collective agreement shall not be determined by disciplinary dismissal."
In addition, the purport of the amendment of the collective agreement after this case, or whether there is an error of violation of the rules of evidence in the fact-finding of the court below as to the grounds for dismissal, etc. by workers in the decision of the court below, is nothing more than the purport of the court below's finding that the court below erred in the violation of the rules of evidence. Thus, this cannot be an unlawful ground that affected the judgment
Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Song Jin-hun (Presiding Justice)