logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2014.02.14 2013구합25924
재심판정취소
Text

1. On September 4, 2013, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered the Central Labor Relations Commission’s remedy for unfair dismissal between the Plaintiff and the Defendant joining the Defendant.

Reasons

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. On January 16, 1971, the Plaintiff is a school juristic person established with 181 full-time workers in C for the purpose of higher education and new education by making use of 181 full-time workers in C, and the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is a person whose contract period expires on April 18, 2013 when he/she joined the Plaintiff juristic person and serves as a principal officer on April 19, 2010.

B. On April 18, 2013, the Intervenor filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission on April 19, 2013, alleging that the Plaintiff’s notification of the termination of labor relations on the ground of the expiration of the contract period was unfair, even though he/she was an employee who entered into an employment contract without a fixed period of time pursuant to Article 4(2) of the Act on the Protection, etc. of Fixed-Term and Part-Time Workers (hereinafter “fixed-term Act”). On June 11, 2013, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission rejected the Intervenor’s labor relationship between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor on April 18, 2013 on the ground that “In the case of the Intervenor, Article 4(1)5 of the Fixed-Term and Part-Time Workers Act and Article 3(1)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Fixed-Term Act were not applicable, and thus, the Intervenor’s employment relationship between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor was terminated on the ground that it would not be against the principle of trust or good faith of the Intervenor’s.”

Seoul 2013 only 1128). (c)

Accordingly, the intervenor filed an application for review with the National Labor Relations Commission, and the National Labor Relations Commission on September 4, 2013 is recognized as reasons under the proviso of Article 4(1)5 of the Fixed-term Act and Article 3(1)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Fixed-term Act.

arrow