Of the instant lawsuits, the part of the claim for nullification of dismissal is dismissed.

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) on December 12.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a company operating and managing sports facilities, and the Plaintiff is an employee employed by the Defendant as a health radar and was dismissed.

B. On May 5, 2019, the head of the Defendant’s headquarters sent the Plaintiff a Kakao Stockholm message stating that the Plaintiff’s employment relationship is terminated on May 11, 2019.

(hereinafter “instant dismissal disposition”). C.

On May 7, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an application for remedy against unfair dismissal with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission on the ground that the dismissal of the instant case is unreasonable.

On July 4, 2019, Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission accepted the Plaintiff’s application for remedy on the ground that “the Plaintiff’s employment relationship unilaterally terminated against the Plaintiff’s will and constitutes dismissal, and the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of his dismissal to Kakakao Stockholm message and violated the duty to notify in writing under Article 27(1) of the Labor Standards Act.”

[Judgment of the court below] Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's main claim

A. We examine ex officio the validity of the claim for nullification of dismissal of the instant lawsuit as to the validity of the claim for nullification of dismissal.

In general, the purpose of a lawsuit for nullification of dismissal is to recover the status of an employment contract between the employee and the company, in case where the employee seeks the invalidity of the dismissal disposition and seeks the wage during the period in which he could have provided his labor.

Therefore, if a worker recovers the worker's status due to an employer's reinstatement order, etc. after the worker was at a disadvantage such as dismissal, the claim for nullification of the dismissal is not merely a claim for confirmation of the past legal relationship, and thus there

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 90Meu27389, Feb. 22, 1991). In addition to the respective descriptions and arguments set forth in subparagraphs 3 and 4, the Defendant’s headquarters C on Nov. 7, 2019.