1. Disposition imposing KRW 11,200,000 for compelling the performance imposed on the Plaintiff on March 14, 2016 by the National Labor Relations Commission, and October 14, 2016.

Details of the disposition

The plaintiff is a person who has been awarded a contract with the Corporation C Mining Office for services such as coal production, and D (E) and F (G (hereinafter referred to as the "workers of this case") are those who have provided work for the plaintiff at the above C Mining Office.

On May 29, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the instant workers of the fact that “the Plaintiff would be dismissed on the same day as it reaches the retirement age on June 30, 2015.”

(hereinafter “instant dismissal.” On June 8, 2015, the instant employee filed an application for remedy with the Gangwon Regional Labor Relations Commission by asserting that the instant dismissal was unfair. The Gangwon Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the application for remedy on August 7, 2015, and notified the said employee on September 4, 2015.

The instant workers appealed and applied for reexamination as K/L to the National Labor Relations Commission.

On November 25, 2015, the National Labor Relations Commission recognized the dismissal of the instant case as unfair, and rendered a decision of reexamination with the purport of an order of remedy, “within 30 days from the date of receipt of the written adjudication, the Plaintiff reinstated the instant workers to their original position, and would pay the amount equivalent to the wages that would have been paid if the said workers worked normally during the period of dismissal (hereinafter “instant order of remedy”).”

hereinafter referred to as "the decision of review of this case"

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the revocation of the instant remedy order as Seoul Administrative Court 2015Guhap83580, and the instant workers participated in the said lawsuit as the Intervenor joining the Defendant.

In the above case, the issue was whether the collective agreement concluded between the previous business entity and the labor union regarding the retirement age of the instant workers determined the contents more favorable than the rules of employment of the Plaintiff.

The Seoul Administrative Court shall make the said collective agreement to the Plaintiff on August 12, 2016.