logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.10 2018나1208
선지급금 반환
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

[Claim]

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal as follows. Therefore, this part of the judgment of the court of first instance citing the reasoning of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The dismissal of the dismissed part refers to the termination of all labor contract relations between the employer and the employer against the employee’s will, regardless of the name or procedure unfavorable to the employee in the actual place of business, regardless of the name or procedure unfavorable to the employee. The burden of proving that the termination of labor relations is caused by dismissal, not by voluntary withdrawal, in claiming a offset against the Plaintiff, the retired employee, as in the instant case, on the premise that the Defendant, as the employer, has the damage claim for the unfair dismissal.

In addition, in general, if an employer's unfavorable disposition of dismissal, etc. against workers is judged null and void due to a lack of justifiable grounds, such dismissal, etc. may not immediately constitute a tort, and it is objectively clear that the employer intentionally, under the intention of seeking to find workers out of the workplace without any grounds such as disciplinary dismissal, a disposition of dismissal, etc. by using the means of disciplinary action on the ground of a nominal dismissal, etc., or that a fact which caused dismissal, etc. does not constitute a ground for disciplinary action, such as rules of employment, or cannot be considered a ground for disciplinary action, if he/she paid attention, he/she can easily find such circumstance even if he/she did so, and even if he/she did not take a legitimate procedure, it is recognized that the employer has intentional or negligent conduct on the ground of unfair dismissal, etc., or abuse of the right to disciplinary action.

arrow