Whether the amended rules of employment is valid as to workers who have individually consented to the modification in case where the rules of employment are modified disadvantageous to workers without consent by collective decision-making method of the workers group (negative)

Where an employer amends the rules of employment disadvantageous to a worker, it does not take effect as to workers who have individually consented to the revision of the rules of employment, unless consent is obtained from the collective decision-making method of the worker group, so even if the revised rules of retirement, etc., which provide that a family worker is notified of the amended rules of retirement from the company that is the employer, and without objection, work as it is, it shall be deemed that the revised rules of retirement, etc., even if it is deemed that the revised rules of retirement

Article 95 of the Labor Standards Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Han-sung, Attorneys Park Jae-soo and 1 other, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellee)

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 3 others, Counsel for defendant-appellee

Korea Mining Promotion Corporation (Attorney Kim Han-han, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 90Na41861 delivered on December 13, 1990

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The defendant's attorney's grounds of appeal are examined.

The court below held that the amended retirement allowance rules, etc. are not effective against the plaintiffs, in light of the related Acts and subordinate statutes, unless the employer amends the rules of employment disadvantageously to the workers without the consent of the worker group in a collective decision-making manner, it does not take effect as to the workers who have consented to the amendment of the rules of employment. Thus, even if the plaintiffs were to be notified of the revised rules of retirement as well as their work without any objection, and even if the revised rules of retirement are deemed to have consented individually and implicitly, the revised rules of retirement allowance, etc. are not effective against the plaintiffs. In light of the related Acts and subordinate statutes, the above decision of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles on employment contracts under Article 95 (b) of the Labor Standards Act

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)