부당해고구제재심판정취소
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. C. between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor joining the National Labor Relations Commission on January 23, 2019.
1. The court's explanation concerning this part of the decision by reexamination is identical to the reasons for the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil
2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff submitted the written resignation to the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is an offer to terminate the agreement on labor contract.
However, since the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to effectively withdraw the offer before the Intervenor reaches the Plaintiff, the labor contract relationship between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor was not terminated.
Therefore, even if the intervenor retired against the plaintiff's will, it constitutes an unfair dismissal, the judgment of the retrial of this case, which was otherwise determined, should be revoked as unlawful.
B. On July 1, 2017, the Intervenor entered into the instant consignment contract with the council of occupants’ representatives for the instant apartment on a two-year basis. The Plaintiff was dispatched from January 22, 2018 to the management office of the instant apartment from January 22, 2018. (2) There was conflict between the Plaintiff and the president of the council of occupants’ representatives for the instant apartment with regard to the approval of the disbursement resolution on the payment of the encouragement deposit and the notice of the public notice of the said election.
Accordingly, on March 2, 2018, the council of occupants' representatives of the apartment in this case sent a document of title “request for verification of performance and demand for measures against abandonment of duties by the head of the management office” to the intervenors on March 20, 2018.
3) On March 30, 2018, the council of occupants’ representatives notified the intervenors of the instant apartment management office that they would terminate the instant consignment contract as of April 30, 2018 on the grounds of the Plaintiff’s inappropriate working attitude, etc., which is the head of the instant apartment management office. On May 2, 2018, the council of occupants’ representatives demanded the Plaintiff to not attend the office of the instant apartment management office on May 3, 2018.