The case holding that the act of issuing a written resignation at the victim's request in order to obtain favorable disposition in a criminal case that inflicts an injury on the chairman of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Council does not constitute either declaration by coercion or a violation of public order or

The case holding that the act of issuing a written resignation at the victim's request in order to receive favorable disposition in a criminal case that inflicts an injury on the chairman of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Council is not a declaration of intent by coercion or a violation of public order and good

Article 27 of the Labor Standards Act, Articles 110 and 103 of the Civil Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jae-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Plaintiff

The Chairman of the National Labor Relations Commission

Samwon Passenger Co., Ltd., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 92Gu11703 delivered on April 8, 1993

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below rejected the plaintiff's assertion that, based on its adopted evidence, the plaintiff became a driver on November 3, 1989 and worked as a participant company for the intervenor joining the defendant company (hereinafter referred to as the "participating company") and caused injury in need of approximately six years of treatment by assaulting the non-party who is the chairperson of the intervenor's labor union division within the company on July 10, 1991, as stated in its reasoning, and thereby, the plaintiff was accused of the complaint from the non-party, and the non-party was decided to resign from the above intervenor company at the request of the non-party in order to be exempted from detention due to the above criminal case and to receive favorable treatment, the non-party's written resignation and the written agreement was drafted. The non-party's labor division of the intervenor company was submitted to the intervenor company through the chief of the labor union and confirmed whether the plaintiff's resignation was a voluntary resignation, and that the plaintiff was not entitled to the plaintiff's reasonable resignation and the non-party's allegation that the plaintiff's resignation was issued in the same month.

In light of the records, the fact-finding and decision of the court below is just and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or incomplete hearing such as the theory of litigation.

The court below's rejection of the Plaintiff's assertion that the Plaintiff retired from the Intervenor's company at the request of the Nonparty, the victim, constitutes an error of law by misapprehending the legal principles as to the declaration of intent by coercion, and the preparation and delivery of the above resignation cannot be deemed as null and void as a violation of public order and good morals. The arguments are without merit.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Jong-ju (Presiding Justice)