The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. In principle, when a disciplinary measure is taken against a worker due to the reason for the disciplinary measure, the disciplinary measure is placed at the discretion of the person having the authority to take the disciplinary measure, so that the disciplinary measure is unlawful, it shall be limited to the case where the disciplinary measure has been deemed to have been abused by the person having the authority to take the disciplinary measure, as

If a disciplinary action is deemed to be a disposition which substantially lacks validity under the social norms, it shall be determined that it is objectively unreasonable in consideration of the characteristics and nature of duties, the contents and nature of the misconduct caused by the grounds for the disciplinary action, and the purpose of the disciplinary action and the circumstances accompanying the disciplinary action.

(1) In cases where an employee is subject to disciplinary dismissal or a disciplinary dismissal under the ordinary social norms, the employer is deemed to have been responsible for an employee to the extent that the employee cannot continue to have an employment relationship. In addition, whether the employee’s employment relationship with the employee concerned has reached the degree that it is impossible for him/her to continue an employment relationship under the ordinary social norms should be determined by comprehensively examining various circumstances, such as the purpose and nature of the relevant employer’s business, conditions of the relevant employee, status and duties of the relevant employee, details of the relevant employee’s status and duties, motive and background of the relevant misconduct, influence on the corporate order, such as the risk of disturbing the corporate order due to such disciplinary action, and past attitude, etc.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Du10455 Decided May 28, 2002, etc.). Meanwhile, in a case where there are multiple facts of disciplinary action against workers, the determination should not be made with only one of the grounds for the disciplinary action or a part thereof, but rather with the overall reasons (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da21962, Mar. 24, 201). Moreover, if some of the grounds for the disciplinary action is not recognized, some of the grounds for the disciplinary action are recognized.