[1] Whether a chapter or a branch of a trade union, which is a subordinate organization, has the ability to independently conduct collective bargaining and sign collective agreements (affirmative with qualification)

[2] In a case where the labor-management agreement that was concluded by the division Eul of the regional headquarters of the labor-management agreement that was concluded with Byung limited partnership is valid as a collective agreement or wage agreement, the court below held that the above labor-management agreement was null and void on the ground that the labor-management agreement cannot be deemed as an independent organization for which the division is independently collective bargaining and the collective agreement is not concluded without sufficient deliberation, even though the president of the division should have clarified the actual relationship between Eul and Eul, including whether the division was actually conducting collective bargaining and the collective agreement was formed by delegation of the president of the regional headquarters before the above labor-management agreement was concluded with Byung, the court below held that the above labor-management agreement was null and void on the ground that the labor-management agreement cannot be deemed as an independent organization with independent rules and executive organs with independent organization

[1] Article 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act / [2] Article 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the Trade Union

[1] Supreme Court Decision 200Do4299 decided Feb. 23, 2001 (Gong2001Sang, 812) Supreme Court Decision 2001Du5361 decided Jul. 26, 2002 (Gong2002Ha, 2074)

Plaintiff 1 and four others (Attorney Lee Jae-soo, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Limited Partnership Co., Ltd. (Attorney Choi-soo et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Daejeon District Court Decision 2010Na5258, 5265, 5272, 5289 Decided December 8, 2010

The part of the judgment of the court below against the defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Daejeon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In a case where a chapter or a branch, which is a subordinate organization of a trade union, performs activities as an independent organization with independent rules and executive organs, it may independently conduct collective bargaining and sign collective agreements with respect to matters unique to the relevant organization or its members, and this does not affect whether the said chapter or branch has reported the establishment thereof pursuant to Article 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2000Do4299, Feb. 23, 2001; 2001Du5361, Jul. 26, 2002).

(4) According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below rejected the labor-management agreement that was concluded on November 206 with the Daejeon District Association (Seoul District Headquarters) on the premise that the labor-management agreement was concluded with the employees of Daejeon District Association (hereinafter referred to as the " Daejeon District Association"), and concluded the wage agreement with the employees of the Daejeon District Association (hereinafter referred to as "the wage agreement of 670,640") on the premise that the labor-management agreement was not concluded for 0 years since January 1, 207. The defendant did not have an independent authority to negotiate the labor-management agreement with the employees of the Daejeon District Association (hereinafter referred to as "the labor-management agreement of this case"). The defendant did not have an obligation to pay 50,000 won to the employees of the Daejeon District Association for the reasons that the labor-management agreement was not concluded with the employees of the Daejeon District Association (hereinafter referred to as "the above labor-management agreement"), on September 12, 2007.

However, we cannot accept the judgment of the court below that the light status council cannot be viewed as an independent organization that can independently conduct collective bargaining and sign a collective agreement.

According to the judgment below and evidence duly employed by the court below, an industrial trade union that has signed the labor-management agreement with the non-party 2 and the non-party 3 workers engaged in such labor-management agreement. On July 30, 2002, the non-party 2 signed the labor-management agreement with the non-party 3's president or the non-party 2's president of the labor-management agreement with the non-party 5's president of the labor-management agreement and signed the labor-management agreement with the non-party 4's president at the time of signing the labor-management agreement with the non-party 3's president of the labor-management agreement, the non-party 1's president of the labor-management agreement or the non-party 2's president of the labor-management agreement with the non-party 4's president at the time of signing the labor-management agreement with the non-party 1's president of the labor-management agreement with the non-party 3's president and the non-party 4's president of the labor union.

Examining the above facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, even if the Mine Status Association did not have a sexual inquiry provision, it may be deemed that the Mine Status Association acted as a labor organization in accordance with practice or the rules of the National Taxi Industry Workers' Union, and furthermore, if the president of the Daejeon District Headquarters has independently conducted collective bargaining and concluded a collective agreement without delegation from the head of the Daejeon District Headquarters, the Mine Status Association is likely to independently conduct collective bargaining and conclude collective agreements with respect to matters unique to its members and determine that it is a trade union capable of concluding collective agreements.

Therefore, the court below should have determined that the labor-management agreement in this case is null and void on the grounds that the president of the Gwangjin-gu Branch had concluded the wage agreement or the labor-management agreement with the defendant before the labor-management agreement in this case, by examining whether it was made by delegation by the president of the headquarters of the Daejeon District Headquarters, and should have clarified the substantial relationship between the light status conference, including whether the labor-management agreement was actually made by independently collective bargaining and collective agreement. Nevertheless, the court below concluded that the labor-management agreement in this case cannot be deemed null and void on the ground that the labor-management agreement in this case cannot be seen as an independent organization that can independently collective bargaining and conclude the collective agreement without sufficient deliberation. In this case, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the division of the labor union as an independent organization with the rules and executive body, and by recognizing the fact beyond the limit of the free evaluation of evidence, which affected

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, each part of the judgment below against the defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Si-hwan (Presiding Justice)