beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On July 1, 2013, A, who was the Plaintiff, filed an application for remedy against unfair dismissal with the Defendant on the ground that “the Plaintiff was dismissed due to a failure to receive written notice of the grounds for dismissal and the time of dismissal,” and the Defendant accepted the Plaintiff’s assertion on August 27, 2013 and issued a remedy order against the Plaintiff to order the Defendant to pay KRW 3,730,400 equivalent to the wages during the unfair dismissal period during the unfair dismissal period (hereinafter “instant remedy order”). However, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the Defendant’s above remedy order, and failed to perform its duty under the above determination upon filing an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission.
B. On October 14, 2013, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of imposition of a non-performance penalty on the non-performance of the instant remedy order. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an application for reexamination on the instant remedy order and filed an opinion to the effect that no non-performance penalty should be imposed since the instant case is pending, and failed to comply with the said remedy order.
C. On December 5, 2013, the Defendant imposed KRW 5,000,000 on the Plaintiff for compelling the performance (hereinafter “instant disposition”). D.
With respect to a request for retrial filed by the Plaintiff against the instant order for remedy, the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for retrial on December 23, 2013. On January 28, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an appeal against the Chairperson of the National Labor Relations Commission with the Daejeon District Court 2014Guhap504 by asserting that the said decision for retrial ought to be revoked as it is unlawful. However, on September 4, 2014, the said court was sentenced to a ruling of dismissal from the said court, and the appeal and appeal were all dismissed (Seoul High Court Decision 2014Nu1715, Nov. 27, 2014; Supreme Court Decision 2014Du46775, Mar. 26, 2015).
[Ground of recognition] without any dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 to 5, 9, 11.