(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.10.02 2013가합80431

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.10.02 2013가합80431

해고무효확인및임금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. On May 16, 2013, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff, who is the Defendant’s employee, by telephone notice. Since the above dismissal was made without written notice or justifiable grounds, it is null and void, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff wages at the rate of KRW 2,69,660 from May 17, 2013 to the date of reinstatement.

B. The labor contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is terminated by the Plaintiff’s voluntary declaration of intention to resign, and the Defendant did not dismiss the Plaintiff. Even if the Defendant was dismissed on April 30, 2013, the Plaintiff entered the Defendant on April 30, 2013 and was absent from work on about 15 days thereafter, there is a justifiable reason for dismissal.

2. Although there is no dispute between the parties that the Plaintiff did not work from May 16, 2013 while he/she was employed by the Defendant on April 30, 2013, the fact that the Plaintiff did not work from May 16, 2013, there is no evidence to recognize that the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff on May 16, 2013.

Rather, in full view of the purport of the entire argument at the witness C’s testimony, the Plaintiff made a call with C on May 16, 2013, which is the head of the Defendant’s headquarters, with respect to the absence from office on several occasions, and the Plaintiff responded to the disposition of the Defendant Company, and it is recognized that C asked the Plaintiff to be aware of the fact that he/she would be the Plaintiff after he/she entered his/her superior with his/her superior. According to the above facts, it is reasonable to deem that the labor contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was terminated by the agreement by recommending the Defendant Company to resign and the Plaintiff’s consent.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion on the premise that the defendant was dismissed is without merit to examine further.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is without merit, and it is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.22 2014가합34084

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.11.08 2018가합79

-서울고등법원 2015.08.19 2015나2015335

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.12.11 2014가합522307

-부산지방법원 2019.05.23 2018가합47451