부당해고구제재심판정취소
1. The Central Labor Relations Commission’s dismissal on December 4, 2013 between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor against the Central 2013rd Seah 875.
The plaintiff is a corporation established on February 1, 1984 and employed 190 full-time workers in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, and is engaged in trade business, various manufacturing businesses, wholesale and retail business, specialized construction business, real estate development business, and other profit-making business. The intervenor joining the defendant (hereinafter referred to as the "participating") who was employed by the plaintiff on May 14, 2007 and was dismissed from office as the head of the 1st team in the development of financial business and the head of the business administration team. The intervenor C was employed by the plaintiff on July 1, 1986 and was dismissed from office as the head of the financial strategy team and the head of the alternative investment headquarters.
The intervenors were subject to disciplinary action in relation to the investment in E Co., Ltd. (formerly, “F Co., Ltd.”, “F”) established on May 19, 2006, wholesale and retail business of concentrated imported products, and capital as a stock company operating the Export and Import Act is KRW 1 billion; hereinafter “E”), and the Intervenor B was dismissed from disciplinary action on May 29, 2013, and was dismissed from office on June 12, 2013 in the proceeding of retrial, and C was subject to disciplinary action on May 29, 2013.
(hereinafter “each of the instant disciplinary actions”). On September 5, 2013, the participants of the first instance trial and the second instance trial made an application for unfair dismissal to the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission (Seoul 2013 Deputy 1979). On September 5, 2013, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission recognized that each of the instant disciplinary actions against the intervenors is unfair, the Plaintiff made a decision to reinstate the intervenors to their original position within 30 days from the date of receipt of the written adjudication and to pay the amount equivalent to the wages that the Intervenor could have received if the Intervenor had worked normally during the period of dismissal.
In this regard, the Plaintiff filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission (Central 2013rd Seah 875), but the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination to the effect that the said initial inquiry tribunal was maintained on December 4, 2013.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant decision on reexamination”). 【Ground for recognition” has no dispute, and