Attached 1 List of Plaintiffs (Law Firm Hanro, Attorneys Sung-hee et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Daegu Metropolitan City (Attorney Woo-won, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

September 24, 2014

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiffs 5% interest per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to September 2, 2014, and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment of the copy of the complaint of this case as to each of the corresponding amounts and each of the above amounts stated in the "amount of claim" in the separate sheet of claim No. 2-1.

1. Basic facts

A. Status of the parties

The Plaintiffs are school accounting employees (Article 2 of the Guidelines for Contract Management of School Accounting Personnel) who provide labor at each school and receive remuneration from the school accounting established by each school from the date indicated in the “the first contract date” column of the attached Table 2-2 from each date indicated in the attached Table. The Defendant is a local government in charge of the education, science, technology, sports, and other academic affairs of local governments pursuant to Article 2 of the Local Education Autonomy Act.

(b) Statutes related to the school accounting and basic guidelines for formulating the school accounting budget;

1) The Elementary and Secondary Education Act provides for the basis for the establishment and operation of school accounting. The main contents are as shown in attached Form 3-1.

2) Under Articles 30-2(5) and 30-3(6) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the Defendant has established and implemented the “Tgu Metropolitan City Accounting Rules” to provide for matters necessary for the establishment and operation of school accounting of Daegu Metropolitan City-affiliated schools. Under Article 10(1) of the above Accounting Rules, the Defendant has formulated annual basic guidelines for the formulation of the school accounting budget and instructs the head of the school under his/her jurisdiction not later than three months prior to the commencement of the fiscal year.

3) Among the basic guidelines for the formulation of the school accounting budget prepared annually, matters relating to the recruitment and remuneration of the school accounting staff and, in particular, the staff of the Gu Council on Fostering (Gu Council on Fostering) are as shown in attached Form 3-2.

C. The plaintiffs' employment contract and work years

1) In accordance with the basic guidelines for the formulation of the school accounting budget in 2004 through 2007, the Plaintiffs entered into an employment contract (hereinafter “existing employment contract”) with the head of each school and one-year contract worker (from March 1 of each year to February of the following year). The Plaintiffs, except for those from March 1, 2005 to February 2, 2006, from March 2006 to February 2, 2007, from March 2008, from March 2007 to February 2, 2008, from March 2007, from March 8, 2008, and Plaintiff 37 (Change: Plaintiff 18) were paid according to the Plaintiff’s salary class indicated in the attached Table 2-3, from March 1 of the year to February 2007 to February 37, 205, and were paid as Plaintiff 9’s salary class 2-4, and Plaintiff 5’s salary class for employment.

2) On September 1, 2007 through October 207, each of the plaintiffs entered into an employment contract (hereinafter "employment contract in 2007") under the conversion between the head of each school under his/her control and the head of each inorganic contract (the period of employment contract: the period of employment contract from October 1, 2007 to the end of the month in which the date on which he/she reaches age 57 falls). According to this, the remaining forms of remuneration payment except the plaintiff 4 and the plaintiff 5, which were written on the monthly salary system, are the salary system. In relation to the amount of payment, where the salary class is explicitly prescribed as "Grade 6," ② where the salary class is explicitly determined in accordance with the Personnel Management Regulations (Employment Rules) for the Personnel Management of the School Accounting Personnel, ③ where the revenue budget for the operation of the school provides that local public officials in accordance with the Local Public Officials Remuneration Regulations and the Local Public Officials Allowance Regulations shall apply mutatis mutandis, and there is a difference between the plaintiff and each other.

3) As stipulated in the employment contract in 2007, the Plaintiffs served as office assistants in each of their respective affiliated schools until May 31, 2012 (the same shall apply to the Plaintiff’s work as the former fostering staff, the former fostering staff, and the administrative assistant, even if indicated in the Plaintiff’s employment contract) and the working years of the Plaintiffs’ affiliated schools (based on May 31, 2012) (based on the relevant work experience table) are as listed in the relevant work experience table.

4) Meanwhile, Plaintiffs 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 18, 25, 26, 29, 38, 43, and 47 work experience in the “name of school” column in the “name of school” column in the “name of career status” in the attached Table 2-2, before serving as office assistants in each affiliated school.

(d) Enactment of personnel management regulations and subsequent payment of wages;

1) Based on the above basic guidelines on the formulation of the budget of the school accounting, various working conditions, such as employment and remuneration of the school accounting staff, shall be established to establish the personnel management regulations for the school accounting staff of each school. The major contents of the personnel management regulations for the school accounting staff of each school, effective October 1, 2007, are as follows.

(2) The remuneration of the school accounting staff shall be determined by the principal in consideration of the expertise, difficulty, and degree of responsibility of the relevant duties, and shall be paid in the form of annual salary, monthly salary, daily salary, etc..

2) According to the personnel management regulations for school accounting personnel, the head of each school to which the Defendant belongs paid the Plaintiffs, other than Plaintiffs 9 and 37, based on the remuneration of Grade 10 public officials in local technical service from June 2, 2009 to February 2, 2012, from March 2, 2012 to May 201, 201, Plaintiffs 9, and 37, based on the remuneration of Grade 9 public officials in local technical service, from June 2009 to February 2012, 209, and from March 3, 2012 to May 2012, based on the remuneration of Grade 9 public officials in local technical service, based on the basic salary, household expenses, professional leave expenses, overtime allowances, annual leave allowances, and compensation for unused leave.

E. Conclusion of a collective agreement to improve the wages and treatment of employees of the former Promotion Association

1) On August 26, 2010, the Gyeongbuk-gu Branch of the Korean Women’s Union concluded a collective agreement for the improvement of wages and treatment for employees of the 25 schools representing the 25 schools, including ○○○, etc. (hereinafter “instant collective agreement”). The main contents are as follows.

The salary grade of an employee subject to the salary grade system (hereinafter referred to as "employee of the Gu's fostering group") among school accounting employees who work for a school in the main sentence, shall be increased by one salary grade each year from March 1, 2010: Provided, That in cases where the total amount of the school operation support expenses to be borne by the parents of an individual school exceeds 70%, it may be restricted by the former's salary grade of an employee of the Gu's fostering group. (2) The former's salary grade shall not be applied retroactively: Provided, That in cases where the salary grade of an employee of the Gu's fostering group is applied more unfavorable than the previous one after 207, it shall be re-defined as before, and Article 5 (Effective Period) (1) of the Convention shall be effective from March 1, 2010 to February 10, 201, and the Convention on the Promotion of Salary grade shall be applied retroactively to a school which has been postponed due to collective bargaining.

2) 원고 2(△△중학교), 원고 3(□□여자중학교), 원고 6(◇◇중학교), 원고 7(☆☆중학교), 원고 9(▽▽중학교), 원고 13(◎◎중학교), 원고 15(◁◁중학교), 원고 16(▷▷고등학교), 원고 17(♤♤중학교), 원고 18(♡♡♡♡고등학교), 원고 19(●●중학교), 원고 20(▲▲중학교), 원고 22(■■중학교), 원고 23(◆◆중학교), 원고 25(○○여자고등학교), 원고 27(★★중학교), 원고 28(▼▼중학교), 원고 32(○○여자고등학교), 원고 36(◀◀중학교), 원고 46(▶▶중학교), 원고 49(♠♠중학교), 원고 50(♥♥중학교)은 이 사건 단체협약 교섭의 대상이 된 학교에서 근무하고 있다.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 9, 11, Eul evidence Nos. 12, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 (if any, including each number) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. Summary of the defendant's assertion

1) The Plaintiffs concluded a labor contract with the head of each school to which they belong, and decided working conditions. The principal of the school at issue designated specific work instructions, such as the Plaintiffs’ duties, work methods, and place of work. The Daegu North Korean branch of the Korean Women’s Union, Daegu branch to which the Plaintiffs belong, concluded negotiations to conclude the instant collective agreement on the premise that the Plaintiffs’ employer is the principal of the school. Therefore, the instant lawsuit seeking wages against the Defendant who cannot be deemed as an employer status

2) If local public officials’ remuneration regulations apply mutatis mutandis to the Plaintiffs as alleged by the Plaintiffs and the grounds for the determination of the salary grade arise, the Defendant’s act of paying wages to the Plaintiffs should be deemed an administrative disposition of the re-determination of the salary grade. If the administrative disposition of the re-determination of the salary grade is unlawful, the Plaintiffs should file an administrative lawsuit, such as a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the disposition of the revocation of the re-determination of the salary grade where the correction is refused upon filing an application for the correction of the re-determination of the salary grade. However, the instant lawsuit seeking the difference between the wages arising from the salary grade re-defined and the wages the Plaintiffs actually received without the aforementioned procedures, is unlawful,

B. Determination

1) Determination as to the assertion of eligibility for defendant

A) In a case where an administrative agency of the State has entered into a judicial labor contract, the rights and obligations related to the labor contract belong to the State, which is an administrative body, and thus, the State constitutes an employer under Article 2 subparag. 2 of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act, who is in the position of a party to collective bargaining (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Da40935, Sept. 11, 2008).

B) In light of the above legal principles, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the contents of relevant statutes, such as the Act on the Elementary and Secondary Education and Local Governments, the facts acknowledged earlier, and the overall purport of the arguments as seen earlier, it is reasonable to deem that, even if the Plaintiffs entered into a private employment contract with the head of the school to which they belong, the employer to whom the rights and obligations in the employment contract belong is the Defendant, who is a local government that is the subject of the ultimate rights, obligations, and responsibility for the education of local governments while establishing and operating

① Article 3 subparag. 2 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and Article 6 of the same Act provide that “Local governments shall establish and manage public schools, and public schools shall be subject to the instruction and supervision by the Superintendent of an Office of Education.” Articles 2 and 18 of the Local Education Autonomy Act provide that “The affairs concerning education, art, and science of local governments shall be those of the Special Metropolitan City, Metropolitan Cities, and Dos, and the City/Do shall have the Superintendent of an Office of Education in the City/Do.” Furthermore, according to Article 32 of the same Act, the Superintendent of an Office of Education may establish an educational institution. In light of the above provisions, rights and duties related to education, art, and science, which are conducted within a local government, shall ultimately belong to the local government holding the legal personality of the local government, and the Superintendent of an Office of Education shall be a subordinate institution of Education, which is merely a subordinate institution of the Superintendent of an Office of Education.”

② The school accounting staff is a universal human resources who are not employed according to individual school circumstances, such as human resources (such as librarianss, dietitians, cooks, etc.), human resources (such as innovative school human resources) to implement policy projects by the Office of Education of Cities/Dos Office of Education, and human resources (such as school affairs and administrative assistance) of each school. In addition, the right to appoint and dismiss school accounting personnel is granted to the superintendent of education who is the executive agency in charge of overall affairs concerning education and arts, but it seems that the heads of various public schools are in charge of concluding labor contracts in consideration of the convenience of employment procedures, autonomy in school operation, etc.

(3) Each City/Do office of education shall issue basic guidelines on the formulation of the budget of the school accounting every year in relation to employment and working conditions of employees of the school accounting. The remuneration of employees of the school accounting is paid by the school accounting established in each school. The revenue of the school accounting is mostly created by money transferred from general accounts of the State or local governments, subsidies and subsidies, etc. received by the State

(4) In case of a private school, non-regular workers who are employees of the school accounting are employers of the school accounting, because the school foundation has a labor relationship with the school juristic person.

C) Therefore, the defendant's above assertion to the purport that the defendant is not qualified to be the defendant since he is not an employer status against the plaintiffs is without merit.

2) Determination on the assertion of procedural violation

A) Contracts entered into with an administrative body is a contract under public law and a contract under private law. In general, legal relations under public law are subject to administrative litigation (party litigation) and legal relations under private law are subject to civil litigation. Public law contracts are contracts between administrative body and an administrative body and a private person for the purpose of causing effects of public law. When an administrative body enters into a contract with a private person as a private economic entity, the contract is a contract under private law.

B) In light of the above legal principles, it is reasonable to view that the labor relationship of the school accounting personnel is a private labor contract relationship in light of the plaintiffs' duty to be known in full view of the purport of the entire arguments in the above evidence, and the nature of the law applicable to the labor relationship.

(1) Although the school accounting employee has a aspect of performing public duties in that it contributes to the qualitative improvement of education at the education site, he/she is engaged in the activities to indirectly realize the public interest by assisting the education and administrative activities of teachers and employees who are public officials, rather than directly realizing the public interest, such as school meal services, school affairs subsidies, administrative subsidies, etc.

② According to the basic guidelines on the formulation of the school accounting budget in 2007, “the Labor Standards Act, etc. shall be applied preferentially to employees of the school accounting in accordance with the upper-tier law, which is the general principle, and in cases where there are matters prescribed by Acts and subordinate statutes, education autonomy laws, and various administrative rules, they shall be applied, and in cases where there are no matters prescribed by the rules, the remuneration regulations for local public officials shall be applied mutatis mutandis.” The basic guidelines on the formulation of the school accounting budget in 2010 through 2012 and the labor contract in 2007 shall be governed by the labor-related Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Labor Standards Act, and the personnel management regulations (employment regulations) of the relevant school, etc., and the labor relations of employees of the school accounting shall be applied preferentially to the Labor Standards

③ Under the personnel management regulations for the personnel management of the school accounting, matters concerning the personnel, working conditions, service, etc., the retirement benefit scheme prescribed under the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act shall apply, and where the school accounting personnel suffer from an occupational injury or disease, they shall make accident compensation under the Labor Standards Act or the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, they are subject to the rules of employment different from the public officials who receive retirement benefits and accident compensation under

C) Therefore, the defendant's assertion that the labor relationship of the plaintiffs is subject to administrative litigation is without merit.

3. Judgment on the merits

A. The parties' assertion

1) Summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion

A) The basic guidelines on the formulation of the school accounting budget in 2004 and 2005 stipulate that “the remuneration of the school accounting staff (former promotional salary) shall be paid within the scope of the revenue budget of the school operation support expenses based on the remuneration of local technical personnel class 10 or employment public officials based on their duties.” However, the basic guidelines on the formulation of the school accounting budget in 2004 restrict the criteria for the payment of remuneration to the office assistants, etc. to the 10th class to the 10th class to the 10th class to the 8th class to the 10th class to the 8th class to the 3th class to the 3th class to the 2005 basic guidelines on the formulation of the school accounting budget.

In addition, unless there is a separate transitional provision on the plaintiffs' remuneration in the basic guidelines of the school accounting budget compilation in 2005, the remuneration regulations for local public officials should be applied mutatis mutandis according to the validity of the basic guidelines of school accounting budget compilation and the personnel management regulations for the personnel of the school accounting, which is the rules of employment, which is a legal order. Since the removal of the provision on the restriction on the salary grade for the plaintiffs constitutes a case where the method of defining the salary grade is changed, the plaintiffs' salary grade should be re-defined in accordance with

B) Furthermore, Article 8(2) of the Local Public Officials Remuneration Regulations provides that “The beginning salary grade of a public official shall be defined in the table of the beginning salary grade of a public official in [Attachment 1], but if it does not fall under the same table, a salary grade shall be granted.” In the absence of a career experience, the beginning salary grade shall be defined in the first salary grade, and if there is a career experience, it shall be reflected in the first salary grade. In accordance with the above provision, the Plaintiffs shall be given first salary grade (in the event of a career experience, it shall be reflected) at the time of employment, and the salary grade shall be calculated after the year of 205 (Article 12 of the Local Public Officials Remuneration Regulations).

C) Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the difference between the Plaintiffs’ wages for the last three years based on each salary grade calculated by aggregating the number of years of service in the attached Form 2-2’s school and work experience column (basic salary, household expenses, holiday allowances, holiday allowances, day-to-day holiday allowances, week 3) and the wages (basic salary, household expenses, holiday allowances, day-to-day holiday allowances, day-day holiday allowances, week 4) that the Plaintiffs actually received according to each Plaintiff’s salary according to the attached Form 2-3’s salary grade.

2) Summary of the defendant's assertion

A) Prior to the conclusion of the labor contract in 2007, the Plaintiffs are general workers who entered into an individual labor contract with the head of the school to which they belong, and the Plaintiffs, other than Plaintiffs 5 and 4, became workers of the salary grade recognized as the salary grade since they entered into the labor contract in 2007. Therefore, it cannot be deemed that the grounds for re-determination of salary grade due to the “change of the method of re-determination of salary grade” under Article 9(1)3 of the Local Public Officials Remuneration Regulations, based on the deletion of the contents that restrict the salary grade from the school accounting budget in 2005 to the third salary grade.

B) In order to newly determine the salary class for the school accounting personnel according to the school’s budget circumstances, the Defendant changed the “based on salary class 1 to 3 of class 10 in technical service” of the 2004 basic school accounting budget compilation guidelines into the “based on salary class 10 in technical service” in the 2005 basic school accounting budget compilation guidelines. This is not meaningful to determine the criteria for remuneration, but to the Plaintiffs, it does not mean that the entire salary regulations for local public officials apply mutatis mutandis. Thus, the grounds for re-determination of salary class under the Local Public Officials’ Remuneration Regulations do not occur.

C) The Plaintiffs asserted that the salary grade should be re-defined by making a elevation of salary grade 1 every year retroactively from the time of their employment. However, there is no such retroactive provision as above in the school accounting budget compilation guidelines in 2005. In principle, in accordance with the collective agreement of this case, the salary grade is increased by 1 each year from March 1, 2010, and the salary grade is not applied retroactively. The Plaintiffs’ claims to which the said collective agreement applies are contrary to the principle of good faith and the principle of speech.

B. Determination

1) Whether the plaintiffs are salary grade workers

A) Under the premise that the Plaintiffs’ instant claim was subject to the salary grade system even before the conclusion of the labor contract in 2007, there was a limitation on receiving benefits corresponding to class 10 public officials in local technical service in the Public Officials Remuneration Regulations, but up to class 3. However, the Plaintiffs asserted that the basic guidelines for the formulation of the school accounting budget in 2005 were amended, and that the said basic guidelines were not limited to the application of the salary grade system. Accordingly, the Defendant asserted that the salary grade system was applied to the Plaintiffs after the conclusion of the labor contract in 2007.

Therefore, I first examine whether the salary grade system is applied to the plaintiffs even before the conclusion of the employment contract in 2007.

나) 호봉제란 일정한 기준에 따라 정하여진 초임급을 출발점으로 하여 근속연수나 연령에 따라 급여 등에서 대우를 받는 제도를 말하는데, 앞서 인정한 사실 및 을 제22호증의 40의 기재와 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면 인정할 수 있는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 ① 원고들은 학교회계직원 중에서도 각 학교 학부모들이 부담하는 학교운영지원비로부터 급여 일부를 지급받는 구 육성회직원들로서(중학교의 경우 2012. 8. 23.자 2010헌마220호 위헌결정 에 따라 지방자치단체가 배분하는 전입금 등에서 급여를 지급하여야 한다), 2007년도 근로계약이 체결되기 전의 기존 근로계약에 의하더라도 원고들 대부분은 지방기능직공무원 10급 보수를 기준으로 별지2-3 급여내역표 기재 각 원고별 호봉에 따라 급여를 지급받은 점, ② ♣♣고등학교는 그 소속 학교회계직원인 원고 10, 원고 42에 대하여 근무기간 및 호봉 책정 추이, 1호봉을 올릴 경우 추가소요예산, 다른 학교 사례 등을 참고하여 2006. 3. 1.부터 적용할 호봉을 산정한 점, ③ 2007년도 근로계약은 그 무렵 기간제 및 단시간근로자 보호에 관한 법률이 제정되어 시행됨에 따라 원고들을 무기계약직으로 전환하기 위하여 체결된 것으로, 원고들에 대하여 새롭게 호봉제를 적용하려는 취지는 아닌 것으로 보이는 점, ④ 2007. 10. 1. 시행된 학교회계직원 인사관리규정은 학교회계직원의 보수는 원칙적으로 연봉, 월급, 일급 등의 형태로 지급한다고 규정하고 있으나, 위 규정 시행일 현재 호봉제인 구 육성회직원들에 대하여는 별도로 규정하고 있는 점 등에 비추어 보면, 2007년도 근로계약이 체결되기 이전에도 원고들에게 호봉제가 적용되었다고 볼 수 있다.

2) Whether a ground for re-determination of salary class arises in accordance with the basic guidelines for the formulation of the school accounting budget in 2005

Before the conclusion of the employment contract in 2007, the salary grade system was applied to the plaintiffs. However, whether there was a ground for the re-determination of salary grade under Article 9 (1) 3 of the Local Public Officials' Remuneration Regulations is a case where the method of re-determination of salary grade is changed by deleting the contents that limit the salary grade from the basic guidelines for the formulation of the school accounting budget in 2005 to the 3th class.

A) Contents of the relevant provisions

Details of local public officials' salary regulations, etc., which form the basis for the determination of salary class claimed by the plaintiffs, are as shown in attached Form 3-1.

B) The meaning of the instant provision

(1) Of the basic guidelines in the budget compilation of the school accounting in 2004 and 2005, “The remuneration of the school accounting staff (or the former fostering staff) shall be paid by applying mutatis mutandis the Local Public Officials Remuneration Regulations, allowances regulations, and the budget compilation guidelines for the special accounts of the Daegu Metropolitan City City, within budgetary limits, based on the remuneration of local technical personnel or employment public officials, according to their duties in charge (hereinafter “instant applicable provisions”).” The basic guidelines in the budget compilation of the school accounting in 2004 provide that the remuneration payment criteria for office assistants, etc. shall be as follows: (a) while the basic guidelines in the budget compilation of the school accounting in 2005 prescribed the remuneration payment criteria for office assistants, etc. as “the salary of class 1 to class 3 of class 10 of class 8 of the Public Officials Remuneration Regulations,” the basic guidelines in the budget compilation of the school accounting in 205 shall be deleted from 1 to class 3 of class 1.

However, in light of the facts acknowledged above and the following circumstances recognized by considering the overall purport of the arguments as well as the progress of the implementation of the basic guidelines for school accounting budget compilation, it cannot be said that the meaning of the applicable provisions of this case is to determine the standards for remuneration of school accounting personnel by linking the remuneration of the school accounting personnel (or the former promotional salary class) with the ordinary increase, reduction, or the result of such linkage with the basic salary of the public officials in technical service, and in particular, to apply the remuneration regulations of local public officials in order to define the beginning salary class when a public official prescribed in Article 8 of the Local Public Officials Remuneration Regulations

① The instant provision applies mutatis mutandis to “within the scope of the revenue budget for school operation support funds”. The purport of this provision is that the remuneration of the former fostering staff who received part of the salary from the school operation support funds borne by the parents of each school in the past differs depending on the school principal’s discretion, and thus, it is reasonable to view that the above employees’ remuneration should be improved to reach the initial level of the relevant local public official’s salary, thereby maintaining the amount of remuneration at a level similar to that of the public official’s salary accords with the Defendant’s intent, the author of the instant basic school accounting budget compilation guidelines.

② The Plaintiffs were eligible for the application of the salary grade above 4 as indicated in the attached Table 2-3, after the deletion of the contents that limit the salary grade from the basic guidelines for the formulation of the school accounting budget in 2005 to the 3th salary grade. However, even in such a case, the Plaintiffs did not pay the salary grade every two years, but did not pay the salary grade at all, and did not pay the salary grade at all once every three years.

③ ♣♣고등학교가 작성한 학교회계직원 호봉획정 참고자료(을 제22호증의 40)에 의하면, 원고 10은 2006. 3. 현재 근무기간이 17년임에도 2006. 3. 1.부터 5호봉을 적용받아 이후 2년 뒤에 근무실적 등을 고려하여 1호봉을 승급하기로 하였고, 다른 학교의 경우 ○○여자고등학교에서는 근무기간이 14년 2개월, ♧♧고등학교에서는 근무기간이 13년, ◈◈고등학교에서는 근무기간이 10년, ◐◐고등학교에서는 근무기간이 9년, ▒▒고등학교에서는 근무기간이 8년 2개월인 사람에 대해서 각 5호봉을 적용하였는데, 이와 같이 각급 공립학교의 학교장이 근무기간, 1호봉을 올릴 경우 추가소요예산, 근무실적 등을 고려하여 호봉 승급 여부를 정하였고, 이에 대하여 별다른 이의가 없었다.

④ From the basic guidelines on the formulation of the budget for school accounting in 2010, the head of a school may be employed within the scope of the budget for school operation support, and where an employee in the salary system retires, a new employee shall be employed as an annual salary system in consideration of budgetary circumstances, etc.

⑤ Article 1 of the collective agreement of this case provides that “The salary grade of an employee of the former Promotion Council shall be elevated every year from March 1, 2010 and shall not be applied retroactively: Provided, That in cases where a salary grade is applied more unfavorable than that prior to that prior to that of an individual school after March 1, 2010, the salary grade shall be re-defined as in the previous school, and the said salary grade shall be retroactive to a school which has been postponed on the ground of collective bargaining.” As such, the Plaintiffs who work at a school subject to the negotiation of the collective agreement of this case shall not be recognized retroactively as long as they do not fall under the grounds for the above exception.

The meaning of the provision of this case, as seen above, is to determine the criteria for the amount of remuneration of school accounting personnel (including the former promotion council), and it cannot be deemed that the purpose of this case was to apply the method of defining the beginning salary when local public officials as prescribed in Article 8 of the Local Public Officials Remuneration Regulations are newly appointed. Ultimately, even if the contents of restricting the beginning salary class with salary class 3 in 2005 are deleted from the 2005 205 205 4 or more salary class, it is merely an anti-private interest, and thus, it is merely an anti-private interest. Thus, each of the items of evidence Nos. 3, 7, 8, and 10 (including each number), which is merely a change in the method of defining the salary class applicable to the plaintiffs, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

3) Sub-determination

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims based on the premise that the grounds for the definition of salary grade have occurred to the plaintiffs are without merit.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is dismissed in entirety as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment Omission]

Judges Dok-ho (Presiding Judge)

1) Schools established and operated by local governments are public schools, which may be classified into city schools and Do schools according to the founding entities (Article 3 subparag. 2 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act).

Note 2) Only the plaintiffs who are able to know their salary grades for each period pursuant to the evidence No. 2-1 to 207 (Labor Contract).

Note 3) The amount stated in the “Revised Benefit Schedule (Year 3 years)” in the Schedule of Claim Amount in Attached 2-1.

Note 4) The amount stated in the column for “the benefit received (for the preceding three years)” in the Schedule of Claim Amount in Attached 2-1.

Note 5) The amount stated in the column for “a claim amount” in the Schedule of Claim Amount in Attached Form 2-1.