해고무효확인
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
The court's explanation of this case is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment on the plaintiff's grounds for appeal to the court of first instance as follows. Thus, this case is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
According to Article 18 subparagraph 1 (b) of the Defendant’s penal provision on the grounds of appeal against the Plaintiff’s grounds of appeal (hereinafter “instant provision on dismissal”), the dismissal of an employee who clearly violates the relevant code of ethics may fall under “where his/her qualification is extremely inappropriate as an employee.”
However, each of the instant disciplinary grounds did not meet the requirements for dismissal regulations, such as those that do not constitute a violation of the code of ethics, or that at least, it cannot be deemed that “the code of ethics is obviously violated.”
Therefore, the dismissal of this case is unlawful because it does not have grounds for disciplinary action or goes beyond the discretionary power.
Judgment
According to the evidence cited above, the defendant's code of ethics is used abstract and comprehensive terms, such as "act in compliance with the highest ethics and vocational standards," "responsibility to commit the leader," "integrity," "discrimination and harassment," and Article 18 of the defendant's penal provision provides for dismissal, suspension from office, salary reduction, and reprimand as a type of disciplinary action, and one of the criteria for dismissal is "where the qualification as an employee clearly violates the code of ethics is extremely disqualified (the dismissal provision in this case)," and one of the criteria for suspension from office, "where the person who committed an act in violation of the code of ethics as an employee who violated the rule of ethics of the bank is able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to take into account"
The following circumstances, that are, the defendant, in light of the defendant's code of ethics and the language, purport, etc. of the penalty provisions, are all known.