beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.05.10 2016누70040

부당해고구제재심판정취소

Text

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.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance for the acceptance of the judgment is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for cases where the judgment is used or added as follows. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In the first instance judgment, the "Plaintiff" in the overall title Nos. 3, 8, and 12 shall be added to "the Intervenor".

On April 21, 2017, the Seoul High Court dismissed the Intervenor’s appeal on April 21, 2017.

The Seoul High Court shall add “Seoul High Court 2016Na2064303.” The following is added in the first instance judgment No. 10 of the first instance judgment. In the meantime, the damages incurred among the grounds for the disciplinary action are disputed between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor regarding whether the Plaintiff was dismissed or not, and the method and time of the transfer and takeover. In the situation where there is a dispute between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor, the Plaintiff’s continuing performance of the pertinent duties was caused by the conclusion of the contract to create a new program with another company, and the damages were entirely attributable to the Plaintiff, or there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that there is a proximate causal relation with the grounds for the disciplinary action.

However, the first instance judgment No. 10 No. 21

“This Agreement shall not interfere with the recognition of the grounds for termination under Article 7.”

"Flags".

Where it is sufficient to recognize the validity of the relevant disciplinary action only on the grounds of other partial grounds that are recognized even if some of the grounds for dismissal are not recognized, it shall not be illegal even if the dismissal is maintained.

Supreme Court Decision 2002Da5155 Decided June 25, 2004, and Supreme Court Decision 2011Da41420 Decided November 27, 2014, etc. see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2002Da51555 Decided November 25, 2004.