beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.07.04 2013나73904

해고무효확인등

Text

1. The judgment of the first instance, including the Plaintiff’s claim expanded in the trial, shall be modified as follows:

The plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On February 23, 1979, the Plaintiff became a member of the Defendant and continued to work for the department on the material and supply of engines, and around 2009, the Plaintiff had been working for the material supply sector in the warehouse management of the materials management team within the engine BG (Engine Group).

B. On the other hand, during the investigation process, it was confirmed that the Plaintiff was subject to 10,000 won check from D, in collusion with D’s employees E of the engineBG, who were in charge of the part transport business at the Defendant’s Incheon factory from February 2, 2007 to January 2008.

Around October 2008, F, an employee of the Defendant’s construction machineryBG, prepared a false supply document in collusion with the supplier in which the quantity is lowered, and received a charge exceeding the actual quantity of supply by claiming the Defendant for the amount exceeding the actual quantity and was subject to criminal punishment.

C. The above annual objection requires the Defendant to detect fraudulent acts and promote the soundness of the material management work through thorough material management audit at the whole company level.

Accordingly, from February 20, 2009 to June 30, 2009, the defendant audited 12 employees including the plaintiff for violation of the regulations on material management work.

Accordingly, the defendant issued a standby order to the plaintiff from April 2009 and excluded the plaintiff from his duties.

On June 25, 2009, the Civil Service Commission made a resolution of disciplinary action against nine among the said twelve 12 members and ratified a resolution of disciplinary action against the said nine members. The defendant made a resolution of disciplinary action against the Plaintiff, G, and H (hereinafter “instant dismissal”) and made a resolution of minor disciplinary action against the remaining nine members or ratification thereof.

The grounds for the disciplinary action against the plaintiff are ①.