손해배상(기)
1. The Plaintiff’s appeal against the Defendants and all appeals by Defendants B, C and D are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be individually counted.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as follows: ① between the 20th and 21th of the 8th of the judgment of the first instance, the Prosecutor and the Defendants appealed in both the above judgment, but the Prosecutor and the Defendant appealed in the Daegu District Court case No. 2012No789, May 24, 2013, which is the appellate court, and the Defendants’ appeal was all dismissed, and only the Defendants appealed, and the above case is pending in Supreme Court Decision 2013Do7186, May 24, 2013; ② between the 10th and 11th of the 9th of the first instance judgment and the 11th of the 2012Nu2983 in the case No. 2013, the appellate court, which is the appellate court, rendered a decision dismissing all appeals by the parties on July 4, 2013. As to this, the part of the above case, the Defendant and the Defendant appealed appealed and continued to be cited by Article 12014 of the judgment.
2. With respect to the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants for damages for tort caused by each of the industrial actions in this case, the Defendants asserted that the lawsuit in this case is unlawful as it violates the subordinate agreement concluded between the metal industry users’ council to which the Plaintiff belongs and the Korean Metal Trade Union to which the Defendants belong.
In full view of each of the statements in the evidence Nos. 35, 36, and 37, the metal industry users council, which was delegated by the Plaintiff with the authority to conduct collective bargaining on July 6, 2004, provides that “the company shall not claim for damages and make provisional attachment on the ground of trade union’s activities,” through central negotiations with the national metal trade union member of the Defendants signed on July 6, 2004.”