logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2014.04.03 2013구합9632
부당해고구제재심판정취소
Text

1. The Central Labor Relations Commission’s dismissal on February 21, 2013 between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor, which was unfair in 2012.

Reasons

Plaintiff

With approximately 1,50 full-time workers employed on November 7, 201 and assigned to C for the management of facilities and security business, simple services related to tobacco and ginseng business, etc., the Korea Ginseng Corporation (hereinafter “Korea Ginseng Corporation”) entrusted by the Korea Ginseng Corporation to provide production and production support services to ASEAN. At the C site, approximately 280 employees ( approximately 4 employees and 276 employees in the field, and approximately 276 employees in the production position) are inputs of approximately 3 at the C site, and the Defendant’s supplementary intervenor (hereinafter “participating”) was dispatched to C on June 30, 201 and works as production labor workers on June 30, 201 as a result of being dispatched to C on November 7, 2011, including the date of employment of the Defendant’s supplementary intervenor (hereinafter “the Intervenor”), the application for reexamination of the contents of the decision of rejection of the application for remedy for the confirmation of the termination of the labor contract (hereinafter “instant notification”), and thus, the Intervenor did not comply with the relevant procedures for dismissal.

Facts without dispute over the basis of recognition, entry of Gap 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) did not stipulate that the contract period should be specified in the contract and that the contract is renewed differently. The Plaintiff’s employment rules and personnel regulations also have no provision regarding the renewal of the contract for the contractual worker. In addition, prior to the conclusion of the above contract, the number of renewals of the contract between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor is limited to once, the total contract period is less than eight months, and the renewed contract period is less than eight months, and a considerable number of workers other than the Intervenor were retired due to the expiration of the contract period. In particular, the Plaintiff and the Intervenor Act on the Protection, etc. of Fixed-Term and Part-Time Workers

Since a labor contract was concluded after the enforcement of the contract, the intervenors are related to the labor contract.

arrow