Whether the press activities of a trade union fall under the legitimate scope of activities of a trade union

In particular, in the activities of a trade union, the press activities, such as inducement, distribution, etc. of a trade union, are fundamental and essential activities to maintain and strengthen the unity of the trade union, to maintain and maintain the working conditions and economic and social status of workers who are the object of the trade union, which are linked to the freedom of press under the Constitution. Such activities of a trade union are legitimate trade union activities to the extent that they do not conflict with the employer’s authority, i.e., the right to manage a company, the right to direct labor. Even if the contents of the inducement are not directly related to the working conditions, economic and social status of the union members, it is protected as the activities of a trade union based on the right to organize and the freedom of press under the Constitution, and even if the press activities of a trade union impair the reputation and credit of a specific individual, they are not for the purpose of impairing or impairing the individual reputation on the basis of entirely false facts, and are not for deviation from the activities scope of a trade union to the extent that they are not directly related to the employer’s authority, economic and social status maintenance and improvement.

Articles 1, 2, 21, and 33 of the Trade Union Act;

Plaintiff 1 and two others

The Korean Teachers' Federation, an incorporated association;

1. Each disposition taken by the Defendant against Plaintiff 1 and 2 on August 3, 1989, and each disposition taken against Plaintiff 3 on May of the same month confirm that each disposition taken against Plaintiff 3 is invalid.

2. From August 6, 1989 to the time when the plaintiffs are reinstated, the defendant shall pay to plaintiffs 1 the monthly amount of 1,183,666 won, 960,44 won per month, and 942,00 won per month to plaintiffs 2, and 3, respectively.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

4. Paragraph 2 can be provisionally executed.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Factual basis

A. The fact that the plaintiffs worked as the staff of each defendant federation (the original name was changed to the current name on December 19, 1989, while the original name was changed to the education federation of incorporated associations) and were dismissed from the defendant federation on August 3, 1989, respectively, and the fact that the plaintiffs 1 and 2 were dismissed from the defendant federation on August 3, 1989, and the plaintiff 3 was dismissed from office on the 5th of the same month,

(b) Evidence No. 1 (Evidence 2 (Evidence 3), evidence No. 3 (Evidence 1), evidence No. 4 (Collective Agreement), evidence No. 5 (Written Request for Disciplinary Decision 6), evidence No. 7 (No. 7), evidence No. 8-1 (Notice of Appearance), evidence No. 9-2 (Evidence 9-1), evidence No. 10 (Personnel Regulations), evidence No. 12 (Attachment of Temporary Board of Representatives), evidence No. 13, evidence No. 15 (Board of Directors), evidence No. 15), evidence No. 2 (Evidence 2), evidence No. 16 (Board of Directors), evidence No. 1), evidence No. 2 (Evidence 4), evidence No. 16 (Meeting of Board of Directors), evidence No. 1, evidence No. 18-1 (Board of Directors), evidence No. 2 (No. 19-2), evidence No. 2, evidence No.

C. (1) On July 7, 1982, Plaintiff 1 entered the secretariat of the Defendant Federation and worked as a staff member of educational policy research institutes (hereinafter “labor union”). On February 14, 1989, Plaintiff 2 was elected as the chairman of the Defendant Federation’s Secretariat labor union (hereinafter “labor union”). On December 20, 1982, Plaintiff 2 entered the secretariat of the Defendant Federation and served as a staff member of the editing bureau, and Plaintiff 3 was working as a vice-chairperson of the above labor union with Nonparty 3. On May 18, 1987, Plaintiff 3 was employed as a staff member of the Defendant Federation’s Secretariat and worked as a staff member of the working bureau of the above labor union (Article 5 of the collective agreement).

(2) According to the rules and regulations of the Labor Relations Commission, the Plaintiffs intentionally suspended the establishment of the Defendant Association’s Secretariat in the name of the 1989.3.14, to which the 5th executive officers and employees of the Defendant Association would not be subject to the said regulations, and to which the 13th executive officers and employees of the Defendant Association would not be subject to the said regulations. The Plaintiffs indicated that the 5th executive officers and employees of the 1st executive officers and employees of the 1st executive officers and employees of the 1st executive officers and would not be subject to the said regulations, and that the 5th executive officers and employees of the 1st executive officers and employees of the 1st executive officers and would not be subject to the said regulations, and that the 3th executive officers and employees of the 1st executive officers and employees of the Korea Association would not be subject to the said regulations, and that the 1st executive officers and employees of the 1st executive officers and employees of the Korea Association would be subject to the said regulations. The 3th executive officers and employees of the Korea Association would be subject to the 18th executive officers.

The defendant federation concluded a modified contract in advance and did not report it to the board of representatives and the board of directors before the approval of the board of representatives of the defendant federation. The defendant federation did not issue a director who is not in the organization of the organization or changed business operating expenses, abused personnel rights, etc. and caused social controversy by harming the unity of the workplace. The former President of the 2000 won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won, and the former President of the Republic of Korea won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won won, and the Korean Education Newspapers established the independent accounting system of the above newspaper company without establishing a specific and feasible plan, and revised the organization of the above newspaper company by printing the promotion articles for the implementation of the principal term system of the Korean Education Newspapers on November 21, 198 into the articles for the introduction of the principal term system, and made recommendations to the director and the board of directors of the defendant federation, and made recommendations to the non-party 4 and the employee of the above association to the non-party 5.

(3) The defendant federation shall be composed of the members of the City/Do teachers' organization federation (Article 6 of the Articles of Incorporation of the defendant federation), the members of the Do teachers' organization federation shall be established for the purpose of promoting education by improving the social and economic status of teachers and securing professionalism in teaching staff (Article 2), each City/Do teachers' organization council shall be composed of representatives recommended by the federation of teachers' organizations from among its members (Article 9(1) and representatives of the defendant federation shall be elected from the heads of the administrative districts of the City/Do teachers' organization in Seoul Special Metropolitan City and Metropolitan Cities, or from the representatives' meeting, from the general assembly of the Si/Gun teachers' organization or representatives thereof in other Sis/Guns. In addition, the plaintiffs shall be selected from the above inducement items to the general assembly of the Si/Gun teachers' organization or representatives thereof, and the selection method of the members of the two teachers' association shall be stipulated in the business plan of the two Do teachers' organization, the amendment of the articles of association of the above articles of association, the methods of selecting the representatives of the defendant federation and the vice-chairpersons (the chairperson and the executive secretariat).

(4) Employees in general service of the defendant federation shall be appointed by the chairperson on the recommendation of the secretary general (Article 6 of the Personnel Management Regulations), the sentence, disciplinary action or personnel management regulations shall not be granted leave of absence, demotion or dismissal against their will (Article 51 of the Personnel Management Regulations). Meanwhile, the Personnel Management Regulations of the defendant federation shall stipulate that the employees of the defendant federation shall fulfill their responsibilities in good faith to perform their duties in a democratic and efficient manner (Article 2 of the Service Regulations), the articles of association, regulations and orders on duties shall be complied with, and the order of the articles of association and the duties shall be established in order to establish the discipline and respect the order (Article 3 of the Service Regulations), the public corporation shall be assigned and the public corporation shall respect human rights, and the public official shall not engage in any act impairing his dignity, regardless of inside or outside the workplace, and shall not be subject to removal, donation, entertainment or lending of money (Article 4 of the Service Regulations), and the official duties of the defendant federation shall not be subject to disciplinary action or removal from office without approval of the chairperson (Article 94).

(5) On May 19, 1989, the Defendant Federation’s act of violating the provisions of Article 51 of the Articles of Incorporation and the provisions of Article 53 of the Articles of Incorporation was decided to reprimand the members of the Labor Relations Commission under the responsibility of the secretary general at the time that the members of the Labor Relations Commission would cause water to the Defendant Federation. On the 20th of the same month, some of the members of the Educational Organizations Association would refuse to pay membership fees if they raise an objection to the above union formation. On the 185th of June of the same year, the above members of the Labor Relations Commission distributed printed materials to the representatives of the Defendant Federation and expressed their opinions on the teachers’ labor relations. On the 27th of the same month, the Defendant Federation’s act of violating the provisions of Article 1 of the Articles of Incorporation and the provisions of Article 4 of the Articles of Incorporation and the provisions of the Articles of Incorporation, and the acts of Nonparty 2 of the said Article violated the provisions of the Articles of Incorporation and the provisions of the Articles of Incorporation No. 51 of the Labor Relations Association.

(6) After the disciplinary action against the plaintiffs and non-party 3 was decided by the personnel committee as above, on August 3, 1989, the non-party 7, the president of the defendant federation, and the non-party 3, who was the chairperson of the defendant federation, notified the plaintiffs and non-party 3 of the fact that the heavy disciplinary action against them was decided, it is difficult to go to a foreign country or to go to another workplace, and the non-party 1, the non-party 2, and the non-party 3 recommended them to submit a resignation letter as well as a resignation letter as well. The plaintiff 1, 2, and 3 already submitted a resignation letter upon the request of the party against the others and non-party 3, and accordingly, the defendant federation issued a written resignation notice to the plaintiff 1, 2, and non-party 3 on the same day (the next day of the defendant federation sent a personnel notice to him on August 4, 198), and the defendant's dismissal notice as to the above plaintiff 3's dismissal notice.

(7) On the 5th of the same month, Plaintiff 1 sent to the Defendant Federation a document stating that the resignation of Nonparty 3 was accepted, and that Plaintiff 3’s removal was known, and that the said resignation was withdrawn.

(8) On November 26, 198, Nonparty 4, the Secretary General of the Defendant Federation, decided to introduce a term position system at the 50th meeting of the Defendant Federation, which was held on November 26, 198, suspended approval. On January 5, 1989, the Defendant Federation’s 183 meeting held on March 28, 198, resolved to raise the wages and allowances of the Secretariat employees of the 50th meeting of the Defendant Federation to raise the number of its employees in 9%, and Nonparty 5, the Director General of the 5th meeting, who was held at the 50th meeting of the Defendant Federation, was responsible for the duties of the Secretariat while holding office as the head of the 5th meeting of the Defendant Federation. Nonparty 1, the 50th meeting of the 198th meeting, was appointed as a full-time employee without undergoing an open competition provided for in the Personnel Management Regulations. Nonparty 1, the 50th meeting of the 198th meeting of the Defendant Federation, who had concluded the said budget with the 10th executive Secretariat.

(9) From January 1, 1989 to July 31, 1989, pursuant to the monthly work status report by the staff members of the secretariat of the defendant federation, there is no fact that the plaintiff 1 was absent or retired from office except twice in February 1, 1989, once in March of the same year, once in March of the same year, the plaintiff 3 once in April of the same year, once in April of the same year, and twice in July of the same year.

2. Determination as to the dismissal of the plaintiffs and the claim to nullify the invalidity of the removal disposition

A. The plaintiffs 1 and 2's disposition of dismissal against the above plaintiffs is null and void since the plaintiff 1 and 2 decided to dismiss or dismiss the above plaintiffs by taking into account the legitimate activities of labor union members as grounds for disciplinary action, and received a resignation from the personnel committee based on this resolution, and then made an action of dismissal by the resignation. Thus, it is a disciplinary action without any justifiable reason, which is in violation of Article 27 of the Labor Standards Act, and at the same time violates the social order that guarantees legitimate labor union operation. Second, it is null and void as a dismissal disposition against the above plaintiffs' intent in violation of the personnel regulations of the defendant federation. Third, the above plaintiffs' declaration of resignation by the above plaintiffs was known or could have known that the above plaintiffs' declaration of intention to resign is not a serious intention, and therefore the above dismissal disposition is null and void. Fourth, since the above plaintiffs' declaration of intention to dismiss or dismiss already made by the personnel committee of the defendant federation requesting the above plaintiffs to release the resignation, the above plaintiffs' declaration of intention to dismiss or dismiss the above plaintiff's dismissal disposition was made before the above notice of resignation.

The plaintiff 3 asserted that the above removal disposition against the above plaintiff was made without any justifiable reason to obstruct legitimate activities of the union, and thus, it is null and void in violation of Article 27 of the Labor Standards Act. The second, even if not, it is against the equality in comparison with the plaintiff 2 and the non-party 3, and thus is null and void as it constitutes an abuse of the disciplinary right. The defendant federation asserted that the above removal and removal disposition against the plaintiffs is based on the resignation submitted by the plaintiffs or in accordance with the personnel regulations and service regulations of the defendant federation.

B. Therefore, a trade union is an organization organized by workers voluntarily and collectively to maintain their working conditions, improve workers' welfare, and improve their economic and social status. The workers' right to organize is guaranteed by the Constitution. In particular, the press activities through the distribution of printed materials, etc. of a trade union during the activities of a trade union are fundamental and essential activities to maintain the union's unity, strengthen workers' working conditions and to maintain and improve their economic and social status. This is limited to the freedom of press under the Constitution and should be protected wide as it is connected with the freedom of press under the Constitution. Such activities of a trade union are legitimate activities of a trade union to the extent that they do not conflict with the employer's authority, i.e., the right to manage a company, and the right to direct labor. Even if the contents of incentives are not directly related to the maintenance, improvement, etc. of their working conditions and economic status, they can entirely be protected by the union's independent decision for the purposes of the union's unity and freedom of association under the Constitution, and even if they are not detrimental to the individual's reputation and social status of the trade union.

C. According to the above facts, it is difficult to recognize that all the businesses and affairs of the defendant federation were operated by the resolution of the board of representatives and the board of directors of the above defendant federation, and the organization of the defendant federation was also subject to the resolution of the board of directors. Considering that the plaintiffs' leading activities were not in violation of the above regulations of the defendant federation's organization or non-party 1's organization and activities to understand the purposes of the establishment of the above association, it is an act directly related to the maintenance of union's formation and the improvement of the working conditions of the defendant federation's organization and members, and that the above regulations of the non-party 4's organization and activities were nothing more than that of the defendant federation's non-party 1's non-party union's non-party union's non-party members' non-party officers' non-party members' non-party members' non-party members' non-party members' non-party members' non-party members' non-party members' non-party members' non-party members' non-party members' non-party members' non-party members' opinion or non-party members' non-party members' non-party members' opinion.

D. Thus, the above removal disposition against the plaintiff 3 was made without any justifiable reason, and the above plaintiff 1 and 2 should be null and void without considering the remaining arguments of the above plaintiff 1 and 2, and according to the above facts of recognition, the personnel committee of the defendant federation decided disciplinary action against the plaintiffs 1 and 2 without any justifiable reason, and the non-party 7, who was the chairperson of the defendant federation, notified the plaintiffs of the decision of severe disciplinary action against the plaintiffs at the time, recommended the plaintiff 7 to submit a resignation statement clearly stating the disadvantage that the plaintiffs would suffer, and the plaintiff 1 and 2 already submitted a resignation statement in consideration of the disadvantage that the above plaintiffs would suffer while the personnel committee already decided to dismiss and dismiss. Even if the defendant federation submitted a resignation statement from the above plaintiffs and completed a labor relationship by taking into account the above circumstances, the above plaintiffs' dismissal disposition should be deemed null and void without any justifiable reason and it should be deemed that the above plaintiffs' dismissal disposition was made without any justifiable reason.

3. Determination on the claim for wage payment

As seen earlier, the above disposition of removal and dismissal against the plaintiffs is null and void, barring any special circumstance, labor relations between the plaintiffs and the defendant federation shall continue to exist until the present date. Meanwhile, in this case where the defendant federation refused to receive the plaintiffs' labor services after the above disposition by asserting that the above disposition is valid, the duty of the plaintiffs to provide labor according to the labor contract relations between the plaintiffs and the defendant federation shall not be met due to the reasons attributable to the defendant federation, which is the creditor federation. Thus, the defendant federation shall have the duty to pay the whole amount of wages that the plaintiffs would have received when they continued to work after the above disposition. If there was no such disposition, the wages which the plaintiffs would have received from the defendant federation shall be deemed to have been 1,183,66, and the wages which the plaintiffs would have received from the defendant federation shall be deemed to have been 1,183,660 won per month and 942,000 won per month until the date of the above disposition, and the plaintiff federation shall be deemed to have continued to receive the above plaintiff's labor until 16, 4,6, 96.6.

4. Thus, the plaintiffs' claims of this case are justified, and all of them are accepted, and the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the defendant federation who has lost. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Shin Hyun-chul (Presiding Judge)