In a case where there is a transitional provision that only the employees of the previous organization succeed to the rights and obligations of the previous organization upon the establishment of a special corporation by law, whether the employment relationship of the employees of the previous organization is automatically succeeded to the newly established special

In a case where a new special corporation is established due to the enactment or amendment of a law and requires the succession of rights and obligations by absorbing the functions of an organization such as a corporation which has performed the same function as before, the above transitional provisions do not stipulate any separate provisions as to whether a labor relationship with employees belonging to the previous organization is succeeded, and if a newly established corporation succeeds to all the property and rights and obligations belonging to the previous organization, such transitional provisions merely provide for the purpose of specially regulating the dissolution and liquidation procedures of the previous organization, which are dissolved by facilitating the procedure for dissolution, by allowing the corporation to succeed to the property rights and obligations of the dissolved organization, and thus allowing the employees of the dissolved organization to succeed to the labor relationship of the newly established corporation as a matter of course. Thus, the above transitional provisions do not necessarily mean that a labor relationship of employees belonging to the previous organization naturally succeeds to the newly established corporation under the pertinent law.

Article 30 of the Labor Standards Act, Article 3 of the Addenda to the Korea Development Institute Act ( January 21, 1999)

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Domin, Attorneys Park Jong-soo and 1 other, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Korea Development Institute (Law Firm Rate, Attorneys Kim Jin-kin et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

The Chairman of the National Labor Relations Commission

Defendant 1 and 18 others (Attorneys Kim Young-soo et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 2000Nu14124 delivered on June 22, 2001

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the supplementary intervenor, and the remainder is assessed against the defendant.

In a case where a new special corporation is established by the enactment or amendment of a law and requires the succession of rights and duties of an organization, such as a corporation which performed the same function as before, without any separate provision as to whether a labor relationship with employees belonging to the previous organization is succeeded to, and where a newly established corporation succeeds to all the property and rights and duties of the previous organization, such transitional provision provides for the succession of the property rights and duties of the dissolved corporation to the rights and duties of the previous organization, and does not provide for the special provisions for the dissolution and liquidation procedures of the previous organization to be dissolved by facilitating the procedure for dissolution and dissolution of the dissolved corporation. Thus, the above transitional provision does not necessarily provide for the succession of the labor relationship of employees of the dissolved organization to the newly established corporation as a matter of course, and thus, it cannot be deemed that a labor relationship of employees belonging to the previous organization naturally succeeds to the newly established corporation pursuant to the pertinent law (see Supreme Court Decision 98Da3932, Oct. 23, 199).

On the premise of these legal principles, the court below held that the plaintiff succeeded to a labor relationship between the Korea Food Sanitation Institute and the defendant's assistant employees under Article 3 of the Addenda to the Korea Food Sanitation Institute Development Institute Act established on January 21, 1999, and the plaintiff succeeded to the property, rights, and obligations of the Korea Food Sanitation Institute and the Korea Health and Medical Service Management Institute established on the ground that the plaintiff did not have any provision on whether the plaintiff succeeds to the labor relationship with its employees or not, and that when the plaintiff takes over the affairs of the Korea Food Sanitation Institute, it cannot be deemed that the plaintiff succeeded to a labor relationship between the Korea Food Sanitation Institute and the defendant's assistant employees, and that the Korea Food Sanitation Institute did not liquidate the labor relations with employees including the defendant's assistant employees, and it cannot be deemed that a new labor relationship was formed between the plaintiff and the defendant's assistant employees, and that the plaintiff did not have an implied attitude to issue a medical insurance certificate under the name of the plaintiff for the sake of business transferee and administrative processing, etc., and therefore, it cannot be accepted.

Meanwhile, as long as there is no employment contract relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor, it is nothing more than expressing that the Plaintiff excluded the Defendant’s Intervenor from the eligibility for employment, and it does not dismiss the Defendant’s Intervenor. Thus, it is reasonable to determine that the Defendant’s decision on the retrial was unlawful on the premise that the Plaintiff dismissed the Defendant’s Intervenor, and that there was no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as argued in the Grounds for Appeal. Accordingly, this part of the grounds for appeal cannot be accepted.

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and the costs of the lawsuit shall be borne, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Justices Zwon (Presiding Justice)