1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Basic Facts

The defendant is a company established for the purpose of financial business, etc.

The plaintiff is a member of the credit management division of the defendant.

On January 29, 2016, under the consent of C, the vice-chairperson of the branch of the National Financial Industry Workers' Union B (hereinafter referred to as the "branch of the instant trade union"), which is a trade union composed of the employees belonging to the Defendant, the Defendant revised the rules for operating the wage peak system (hereinafter referred to as the "instant rules") as in the table of comparison with the amendments to the rules for operating the wage peak system in attached Form 2.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole argument of the plaintiff as to the purport of the whole argument shall be subject to the consent of the labor union organized by the majority of workers as it constitutes an unfavorable amendment of rules of employment.

However, on January 10, 2016, C had already expired the term of the vice-chairperson, and on behalf of the branch office of the instant trade union, C had no authority to consent to the amendment of the instant detailed regulations.

Therefore, the amendment of the bylaws of this case is null and void because there was no consent of the branch office of the trade union of this case.

Judgment

In principle, an employer may prepare and revise the rules of employment according to his/her intent, but when the preparation and revision of the rules of employment deprives of the rights or interests of the workers, and imposes unfavorable working conditions, consent by the collective decision-making method of the workers who were subject to the previous rules of employment or the rules of employment, i.e., where there is a labor union organized by a majority of the workers in the workplace concerned, the consent of the majority of the workers should be required, and where there is no labor union organized by a majority of the workers in the workplace concerned, if there is no such consent, the revised rules of employment does not apply to the existing workers whose vested interests are infringed,