1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 30, 1969, the defendant was established independently by cement business division of Hyundai Construction Co., Ltd., which is divided into cement business division and leisure business division consisting of cement manufacturing and sales business division consisting of cement manufacturing and distribution business division as its main business.

The plaintiff is a person who joined the defendant cement business division and works as the director of the C branch office, etc.

B. On August 31, 2010, the Defendant reported a dismissal plan for managerial reasons to the head of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency, and on September 8, 2010, notified the entire workers of the dismissal plan and dismissed the Plaintiff on October 14, 2010.

(hereinafter “instant layoff”) C.

On the other hand, at the time of August 31, 2010, the target and number of workers and members of each trade union, which existed in the defendant, are as listed below.

The fact that there is no dispute over 1,2, 5, 7, 7, 7, 23, and 26, each of the entries in the evidence No. 1, 2, 5, 7, 7, 23, and 26, and the purport of the whole pleadings by the workers of Class 3 or lower-class workers of Class 3 of cement business division (excluding Class 84 or higher-class workers) in the cement business division (excluding class workers), who are workers of Class 4 or lower-class workers of Class 3 or higher-class workers in the cement business division (excluding class 803 workers) of the cement business division;

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant layoff is null and void because it does not meet the requirements for layoff under the Labor Standards Act, and the Defendant is obligated to pay wages to the Plaintiff from the date of the instant layoff to the date of reinstatement.

The defendant's application for the workout program was due to a liquidity crisis caused by the guarantee of payment against the subsidiary. This is due to the defendant's wrong business judgment, and the defendant's employees are "160 employees from cement business division and 50 employees from the Leisure Business Division."