logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.09.10 2015구합882
부당해고구제재심판정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all the Plaintiff.

Reasons

The Plaintiff as the party to the instant decision was established on November 22, 201 and employs 17 full-time workers as a company operating a building management service business, etc., and the Intervenor was employed as a fixed-term worker at the Plaintiff company on January 11, 2012 and was working as the facility management team D at the Gangseosan Islands Co., Ltd.

On March 31, 2014, the Plaintiff refused to renew the contract to the Intervenor for whom the term of the labor contract expires on the same day.

(2) On June 25, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for remedy with the Gangwon Regional Labor Relations Commission on the ground that the refusal of the instant re-contract was unfair. The Gangwon Regional Labor Relations Commission, on August 22, 2014, accepted the Intervenor’s request for remedy.

On September 18, 2014, the Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the above initial inquiry tribunal of the National Labor Relations Commission, filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission. However, on November 26, 2014, the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination on the ground that “the rejection of the instant renewal contract is a refusal of the renewal of the labor contract without reasonable grounds against the Plaintiff, for which the legitimate expectation right to the renewal of the contract is recognized, and thus has no effect as in the

(2) The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff’s refusal to renew the instant contract against the Intervenor was justifiable for the following reasons, and thus, the instant retrial ruling was unlawful. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff’s refusal to renew the contract was unlawful.

According to the non-existence of the right to expect the renewal of the labor contract, the term of the intervenor's labor contract is stated to be terminated on March 31, 2014, and it is related to the renewal of the contract in the employment contract or employment rules.

arrow