logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2012.05.18 2011나71997
해고무효확인 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

Basic Facts

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 and comprehensive tourism resort site development and operation as its main business.

The plaintiff is a person who has been employed in the cement business division of the defendant and served as the director of the C branch office.

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

(hereinafter “instant layoff”) On the other hand, on August 31, 2010, each trade union’s target, workers, and number of union members, which existed in the defendant as of August 31, 2010, are as listed below:

The fact that there is no dispute over the number of workers (including at least 803 workers), 152, 159, 39, 120, and 120 of the number of union members (based on recognition) of 1,2, 52, 193, and 120, and 120 of the number of union members of the cement Business Division workers (excluding at least 803 workers) in the cement Business Division of Class 3 or below of the Cement Business Division of the Hyundai Cement Industry Union, Hyundai Cement, the Trade Union, Hyundai Cement, the World Cement, the Trade Union, Hyundai Cement, the Trade Union, the Hyundai Cement, the World Cement, and the purport of the argument at issue is that the instant layoff 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. In accordance with Article 31(1) through (3) of the Labor Standards Act, where the employer intends to dismiss workers for managerial reasons, it must be reasonable and fair.

arrow