1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant AL Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant AL”) is a corporation that operates information and communications business, and Defendant AM (hereinafter “Defendant AM”) is a corporation established for the purpose of awarding scholarships, children’s education expenses, etc. according to the Framework Act on Labor Welfare.

The plaintiffs are employees belonging to the defendant company.

B. On April 8, 2014, a trade union consisting of workers belonging to the defendant company (hereinafter “labor union”) entered into a labor-management agreement with the defendant company regarding the plan for business rationalization, the introduction of wage peak system, the implementation of special honorary retirement, the modification of welfare system, etc. In addition, the labor-management agreement was included that the university students’ children’s children’s children’s children’s school expenses, the loan system, and the support system for personal school expenses will be abolished as of June 1,

(hereinafter “this case’s labor-management agreement”). At the time, Article 21 subparag. 4 of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act prescribed matters concerning the labor agreement and the conclusion of a collective agreement as a resolution by the general meeting of union members. Article 61(1) of the same Act stipulates that the representative of a trade union shall enter into a collective agreement after the resolution by the general meeting of union members. Article 10(1) of the same Act provides that union

However, the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment did not hold a general meeting of the members or hear the opinions of the members in advance regarding the labor-management agreement of this case.

C. Some of the union members filed a lawsuit seeking compensation for damages on the ground that concluding the labor-management agreement of this case and the subsequent agreement with the union members without a resolution of the union members' general meeting constitutes tort that infringes on the procedural rights of union members in violation of the labor-management agreement.

In the fact-finding court (Seoul Central District Court 2014Gahap35452, Seoul High Court 2015Na2026878), the court accepted the above plaintiffs' tort claim and ordered the defendants to pay consolation money.