logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.10.20 2016구합52767
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 assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

(a) A person who has misappropriated public funds; and

7. A person who causes damage to the management office by divulging any occupational secret.

8. A person who intentionally interferes with the progress of duties by means of violence or intimidation;

1. A person who is determined disqualified for employment as a result of a regular or temporary health examination; 12. A person who, without permission, intends to take out or take out the goods of a management office without permission, shall take disciplinary action according to the following classifications, depending on the degree of the punishment and the circumstances:

4. Dismissal: It shall not be immediately dismissed without making a written advance notice thirty (30) days prior to the date of dismissal, and shall be paid thirty (30) days prior to the dismissal without making the advance notice.

Article 46 (Composition of Disciplinary Committee) In order to ensure fairness in disciplinary action against employees, the Disciplinary Committee shall be composed of representatives of occupants.

* However, the disciplinary committee of the head of the management office shall be members.

Article 47 (Right to Vindication Personnel Affairs)

1. The Disciplinary Committee shall notify in writing the members and persons concerned of the schedule of disciplinary action at least five days prior to such date;

2. The Disciplinary Committee shall give the person concerned an opportunity to sufficiently vindicate himself; and

E. The part related to this case in the rules of employment of the Plaintiff is as follows.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s rules of employment as to the dismissal procedure are ordinarily dismissed (Articles 8 and 9) and disciplinary dismissal (Articles 44 through 48). The Plaintiff, on the grounds of each of the instant cases, ordinarily dismissed the Intervenor in accordance with Articles 8 and 9 of the Rules of Employment.

If so, the procedure of disciplinary action, such as holding a disciplinary committee, is required to dismiss the case.

arrow