부당대기발령구제재심판정취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part arising from the supplementary participation.
1. Basic facts
A. 1) The Plaintiff was established on December 28, 2015, and is a corporation that ordinarily employs six workers and engages in C promotion projects and C-related organization support projects. 2) The Intervenor joining the Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) joined the Plaintiff on June 1, 2016 and served as the Secretary General.
B. On October 10, 2016, the Plaintiff dismissed the Intervenor from position and issued a standby order against the Intervenor (hereinafter “instant dismissal from position”) and on October 19, 2016, the Plaintiff issued a standby order for the Intervenor from October 19, 2016 to the time of separate order.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant standby Order”). C.
On January 3, 2017, the Intervenor filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission on the ground that the instant dismissal from position was unfair on January 3, 2017, and the instant dismissal from position was also filed on February 13, 2017. The Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission determined on February 27, 2017 as follows: “The instant dismissal from position is legitimate, but the instant standby order was not specified and continues for about four months.”
On April 5, 2017, the Plaintiff rejected the Plaintiff’s petition for reexamination on the ground that “the instant standby order was abused by abusing the authority of personnel discretion,” such as the initial inquiry court on June 2, 2017, the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s petition for reexamination on the ground that “the instant standby order was abused by abusing the authority of personnel discretion.”
(hereinafter referred to as “instant decision by reexamination”). 【No dispute exists on the ground of recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is lawful
A. The intervenor in the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion deals with his duties without obtaining D’s approval, the representative of the Plaintiff.