손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the plaintiff's claim expanded in the trial are all dismissed.
2. Demanding and expanding the costs of appeal.
1. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff was an employee of the Plaintiff, who was dismissed on March 2015 from the Plaintiff’s office.
Nevertheless, the defendant requested B, who is an employee of the personnel management team of the plaintiff, to receive unemployment benefits, and continuously demanded B to report the reason for the loss of the plaintiff's insured status as a recommendation agent.
As a result, the plaintiff suffered losses from the payment of a fine for negligence of KRW 3.6 million.
Therefore, the defendant, who is a tort, has the obligation to compensate the plaintiff.
2. Article 15(1) of the Employment Insurance Act provides that an employer shall report to the Minister of Employment and Labor on matters regarding the acquisition, loss, etc. of insured status of an employee employed by the employer, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, and Article 118(1)1 of the same Act provides that an employer shall impose an administrative fine on a business owner who fails to report or makes a false report in violation of Article
According to Gap evidence No. 2, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff reported the reason for the plaintiff's loss of the insured to the personal circumstances, but reported it to the recommendation agency, and received the disposition of a fine for negligence on the ground of violation of Article 15 of the Employment Insurance Act. The defendant's obligation to report the reason for loss of the insured is the plaintiff's business, and the plaintiff was imposed a fine for negligence on the plaintiff by filing a false report in violation of Article 15 of the Employment Insurance Act without properly performing his/her obligation under the Employment Insurance Act. Thus, the plaintiff cannot be exempted from the responsibility of
Therefore, barring any special circumstance, barring any special circumstance, the plaintiff's employee who committed an illegal act or his employee cannot seek compensation for damages arising from the imposition of a fine for negligence.
I would like to say.
Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is justified.