2011Nu21418 Re-employment rejection

A

The head of the Sung-nam District Employment and Labor Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2010Guhap43396 decided May 13, 2011

October 20, 2011

November 17, 2011

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the defendant's rejection of the application for extension of employment period is revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of this Court concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following parts to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this Court shall accept it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. The addition;

The plaintiff sought revocation of the rejection disposition against the plaintiff on the ground that the defendant rejected the application for extension of employment period. However, the evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the defendant refused to accept the above application, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and therefore, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case based on this premise is unlawful.

Even if the Defendant’s refusal to receive the Plaintiff, based on the aforementioned evidence, can be acknowledged that the employment contract between the Plaintiff and the final period expired on November 201, 2010. Thus, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff has a legal interest in seeking the revocation of the receipt refusal disposition.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed, and the judgment of the court of first instance is justified with its conclusion, so the plaintiff's appeal shall be dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judgment of the presiding judge;

Judges Yang Sung-tae

Judges Yang Dong-hwan