beta
(영문) 전주지방법원 2014.05.21 2013가단26892

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 20% per annum from August 6, 2013 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, the defendant, who was a member of the Democratic Labor Union, the South-west branch of the bus main office of the National Transport Industry Workers' Union (hereinafter "Shonam branch") on December 8, 2010, was found to have prevented the operation of the above 90 bus by removing air pressure from the bus 90 bus mained in the plaintiff's parking lot on the ground that the plaintiff did not comply with the demand of collective bargaining. Meanwhile, the defendant's damage caused to the plaintiff by the above illegal act is not a dispute between the parties.

2. As to the Defendant’s assertion on the Defendant’s claim for damages arising from the above tort, the Defendant asserts that the instant lawsuit is unlawful on the ground that there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and Honam branch not to file a claim for damages against the illegal act during the period of strike.

However, the defendant's assertion is difficult to accept for the following reasons.

① The agreement signed on April 21, 201 between the Plaintiff and Honam High-speed Branch (Evidence B No. 1) concluded on April 21, 2011 is purported that “a complaint, accusation, or civil and criminal lawsuit against employed drivers with respect to any illegal act during the period of the strike shall be withdrawn, and no lawsuit related thereto shall be brought in the future.” Since the Defendant is working as a maintenance personnel who is not the Plaintiff’s driver at the time of the preparation of the agreement, it cannot be deemed that the agreement was subject to the attached agreement under the above agreement, and on the other hand, the agreement signed on July 1, 201 between the Plaintiff and Honam High-speed Branch (Evidence B No. 2) made on April 21, 201 with the intent of implementing the contents of the agreement as it is, it cannot be deemed that the agreement was included in the Defendant’s sub-committee agreement as of July 1, 201.

② The agreement signed on January 18, 2013 between the Plaintiff and the Honam branch of the Honam branch of the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “the agreement”) shall only be filed with respect to mutual complaints, accusations, complaints, etc. by the Plaintiff and the Honam branch of the Republic of Korea.