beta
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.04.05 2017구합2790

부당해고구제재심판정취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. 1) The intervenor is a corporation established on April 1, 2001 and engaged in wholesale and retail business for processed fishery products using ten full-time workers. 2) The plaintiff is a person who entered the intervenor on July 25, 201 and carried out delivery business, etc.

B. On July 25, 2016, the Intervenor entered into a labor contract including the following (hereinafter “instant labor contract”) with the Plaintiff on July 25, 2016

1) From July 25, 2016 to 1-1, the date of commencement of the contract: 1) the Plaintiff has a period of time for three months (from July 25, 2016 to October 24, 2016) (i) the period of time for three months (from July 25, 2016 to October 24, 2016). (ii) the period of time for which employment is reserved to determine whether the appointment was made under the condition that the employment was reserved to determine the level of occupational knowledge, capacity, organizational adaptation, working attitude, etc. of the Intervenor. (iii) Even during the period of time prescribed in paragraph (1) of this Article, the Intervenor may be immediately terminated if it is deemed inappropriate for the Plaintiff’s employment standards even during the period of time prescribed in paragraph (1) of this Article, but it is deemed necessary for such determination to determine the period.

5) In the event of final and conclusive employment, the Plaintiff’s probationary period is included in the number of years of continuous service. 2. Work division and work division 1. 2. Business division 2. 2. Delivery division 2) The Plaintiff performed the delivery service by assisting the Intervenor’s agent C, D division, etc. from July 26, 2016.

The written statement made in the intervenor's name in relation to the delivery service is that "the driver has no experience in driving the vehicle, the horse or action is too satisfy, and the goods delivered by the plaintiff are too small, satisfy, and the good points cannot be given to the company," and the written statement made in the name of the Director D is that "act or horse is delivered by the mixed person," if any.