logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2019.11.28 2019다244584 (1)
임금
Text

All appeals are dismissed.

Costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal by the plaintiffs, it is sufficient that the judgment on the parties' allegations and other means of offence and defense should be indicated to the extent that the main text is recognizable to the extent that the grounds of appeal by the plaintiffs are justified, and there is no need to determine

(Article 208 of the Civil Procedure Act). Therefore, even if a court’s ruling does not state a direct judgment on the matters alleged by the parties, if it is possible to find out that the relevant assertion was cited or rejected in light of the overall purport of the reasons for the judgment, it cannot be said that the

Even if the judgment was not actually determined, if it is obvious that the assertion is rejected, it cannot be said that there was an omission of judgment due to the lack of influence on the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The Plaintiff’s argument that there was a separate practice of paying bonuses to the participants of industrial action in addition to the bonus payment practices based on the above working days is not clearly indicated in the reasoning of the judgment below. The Plaintiff’s argument that there was a separate practice of paying bonuses to the participants of industrial action in addition to the bonus payment practices based on the above working days, is not applicable to the hours during which the practices to pay bonuses in proportion to the working hours during the calculation period, if the period of bonus calculation is one month, seven days during which the worker was not in service, and fourteen days during which the worker was in service, and the number of days during which the worker was in service, if the number of days during which the worker was in service exceeds seven days and fourteen days during which the worker was in service.

However, the overall purport of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court below and the time when bonus payment practices based on the number of attendance days were dispatched shall not apply.

arrow