B. Whether the above act under Paragraph (a) is subject to regulation or restriction based on ownership or right to manage a facility where the act was conducted within a place of business outside the working hours as a union activity (affirmative)

C. The legitimacy of an employer’s act of collectively refusing to work and inducing workers to not work in a manner that it is necessary for the employer to extend working hours (negative)

(d) Appropriateness of the provision on punishment for a company which conceals a career or makes a false statement in the resume as a ground for dismissal (affirmative)

E. Whether the validity of a personnel disposition is determined in accordance with the purport of the Convention, where an employer recognizes the involvement of a trade union in the personnel affairs of its members under a collective agreement (affirmative)

F. Purport of the provisions of the collective agreement that “the personnel of the union members shall consult with the union members in advance,” and whether the effect of dismissal must be affected if the person was conducted without such prior consultation (negative)

G. Whether a person has a duty to notify the fact of disciplinary action, even in cases where the collective agreement or rules of employment does not provide for the notification thereof (negative)

B. Even if the act mentioned in the above Paragraph (a) was performed in addition to the working hours as a union activity, if the place is located in the workplace, a reasonable regulation or restriction based on the ownership or right to manage the facility must be complied with.

C. Even if overtime work is performed by a labor-management agreement, the employer’s act of collectively refusing overtime work and inducing workers to not engage in overtime work should not be deemed to be justifiable, since it is necessary for the employer to extend working hours.

D. The resume is not only to decide workers' ability to work but also to decide whether to hire workers through a prior personal judgment, such as workers' intelligence, educational degree, suspension from office, and settlement and adaptation of workplace, so it is necessary to determine whether to work in order to build trust between the labor and the management and maintain corporate order. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to conceal the career in the standing regulations or make a false statement in the resume as a ground for dismissal.

E. Even if the right of personnel belongs to the employer’s authority, the employer may, in principle, impose restrictions on his/her authority according to his/her own will, so if the employer recognizes the involvement of an association in the personnel affairs of its members pursuant to a collective agreement entered into with the trade union, the validity thereof shall be determined

F. In light of the overall structure, contents, and practices of labor and management, etc. of a collective agreement, where the collective agreement provides that “the personnel of a company for the union executives shall consult with the union in advance,” such prior consultation shall be made by having the union make a decision on the personnel affairs by obtaining the consent or approval of a trade union or by consulting with the trade union, and shall be made according to the intention consistent with the trade union, which would be sufficient to obtain the necessity or legitimacy of dismissal from the trade union in order to prevent the trade union from undermining the activities of the trade union due to the arbitrary exercise of the company’s personnel rights, and shall take into account the need or legitimacy of dismissal from the trade union, and shall be taken into account by presenting the opinion from the trade union and taking into account the same. The effect of

G. If a collective agreement or rules of employment stipulate that a person to be disciplined should be notified of the fact of disciplinary action, it cannot be said that the disciplinary action without such procedures is valid, but it does not necessarily have an obligation to notify the person of such fact, unless there is such a provision.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

An act of a part of a union member against or against a decision or policy of a trade union without complying with the will of the union execution and the entire union members can be deemed as an act of a trade union by nature, or an act of a union member cannot be deemed as an act of a trade union merely because it is an arbitrary act as a union member, unless there are circumstances to deem that an implied authorization or approval of a trade union was granted. In addition, even if a union member’s act was conducted in an area outside the working hours as a union activity, a reasonable regulation or restriction based on the ownership or management rights of facilities should be complied with (see Supreme Court Decision 90Do357 delivered on May 15, 190). Meanwhile, even if an overtime work is conducted by an agreement between the labor and management, it is necessary for the employer to extend working hours, and thus, it cannot be deemed as justifiable as it interferes with the employer’s business.

Therefore, the court below's decision to the purport that the plaintiff's act of causing 120 workers, who left the cafeteria at the entrance of the restaurant at the time of the occupation of the union, claiming that the union members' 40 union members' vote at the entrance of the restaurant at the time of the occupation of the union, and instigates 120 workers' refusal of overtime work, cannot be deemed as legitimate trade union activities, and so-called "the ground for dismissal under the punishment provisions" is just (see Supreme Court Decision 91Nu124 delivered on September 24, 1991), and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to dismissal grounds (see Supreme Court Decision 91Nu124 delivered on September 24, 191).

2. Regarding ground of appeal No. 2

The court below affirmed the defendant's explanation that when the plaintiff was admitted to a high school and the non-party company, the non-party company and the non-party company were employed as a member of the daily engineering company, the non-party company's career was falsely stated in the above non-party company's accounting position while concealing the work experience of the non-party company when entering the defendant company, and the defendant company responded to the non-party company's resignation because it was not good in the old-gu situation at the time of entrance interview. After inquiring about the plaintiff's work experience and verification of the plaintiff's work experience, the defendant company received a written pledge of voluntary retirement at any time when the plaintiff was found to be false or omitted and entered in the truth without any falsity or omission. After recognizing that the plaintiff was employed, the court below found that the plaintiff was not only to decide workers' ability to work, but also to decide whether to dismiss the plaintiff through the previous personal judgment such as the worker's intelligence, educational degree, suspendedness, and adaptability of work, and so it was necessary to determine whether to dismiss the plaintiff's work experience.

In light of the records, the above fact-finding and judgment of the court below are just and there is no error of law such as the argument.

3. As to the third ground for appeal

In principle, even if the right to personnel management belongs to the employer's authority, if the employer recognizes the involvement of an association in the personnel management of union members under a collective agreement concluded with the trade union, the validity of the agreement would be determined in accordance with the purport of the agreement. However, in light of the overall structure, contents, and practices of the agreement, Article 13 (2) of the Agreement, which provides that the prior consultation shall be made with the labor union's consent or approval, or shall be made in consultation with the labor union, so that the labor union has the right to make a joint decision with the defendant company or shall comply with the intent of the labor union's voluntary decision-making in order to prevent interference with the activities of the labor union due to arbitrary exercise of the right to personnel management of the defendant company, it shall be sufficiently efforts to obtain the necessity or justification of dismissal from the labor union, and shall be taken into consideration after presenting opinions from the labor union and without such prior consultation, it does not affect the validity of dismissal (see Supreme Court Decision 9Da1749, Jun. 17, 1997).

4. As to the fourth ground for appeal

If a collective agreement or rules of employment provides that a person to be disciplined shall be notified of the fact of disciplinary action, the disciplinary action without such procedures cannot be deemed valid, but if there is no such provision, the person shall be notified of such fact.

The court below is just in holding that the disciplinary action cannot be deemed null and void on the ground that the defendant, in holding the disciplinary committee against the plaintiff, notified the plaintiff and his union members of the fact at least five days prior to the disciplinary action against union members under Article 21 of the collective agreement of the defendant company, and provided that he and union members shall be notified of the right to make a statement about the case, and since there is no provision for notification of the facts of the disciplinary action, the defendant's dismissal without notifying the plaintiff and union members of the facts of the disciplinary action, is not a violation of the interpretation of the collective agreement, as

5. Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and all costs of appeal shall be assessed against the plaintiff who has lost. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Sang-won (Presiding Justice)