beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the following additional payment order shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. The following facts may be found either as a dispute between the parties or as a whole in light of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, and 5.
The defendant is a company running the taxi transport business, and the plaintiff was employed by the defendant from January 30, 2015 to work as a taxi driver.
B. On July 31, 2015, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff on the grounds of the illegality such as habitually committing traffic offenses, grave negligence filing complaints, commercial assault, and weekends, and refusing to prepare a work place, etc. The Plaintiff asserted that the dismissal was unfair and filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission. On December 24, 2015, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission recognized that the dismissal of the Defendant made against the Plaintiff is unfair dismissal on the ground that the justification of the disciplinary procedure is not recognized even if some of the grounds for disciplinary action against the Plaintiff exist, and determined that the Defendant would pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to wages that would have been paid if the Plaintiff was reinstated to his former job and had worked normally during the period of dismissal.
C. On January 1, 2016, the Plaintiff reinstated to the Defendant, and the Defendant paid KRW 5,311,636 to the Plaintiff KRW 5,31,636 as the wage (basic wage, work allowance, night work allowance, work lodging allowance, etc.) during the period of dismissal.
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff had worked during the period of dismissal includes the basic salary, excess taxi commission, and value-added tax reduction. Since the Plaintiff received only the amount corresponding to the basic salary from the Defendant after reinstatement, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 7,184,120, and value-added tax reduction.
B. Determination on the claim for excess of taxi commissions shall be based on the number of actual working days each month for its drivers.