Whether the Seoul Metropolitan Government is the user of the school level employed by the School Fostering Council

The plaintiff is appointed as the level of ○○ Middle School under the jurisdiction of the defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City, but the employment relationship between the plaintiff and the ○○ Middle School Development Association organized by the voluntary consent of parents for the maintenance, management, etc. of school facilities is employed by the head of the school who is an ex officio director according to the delegation of the chairperson of the Development Council with the budget as the ordinary temporary miscellaneous staff and takes charge of the guard of school facilities. The above fostering association is a voluntary organization with certain restrictions and supervision for the smooth development of school education from the defendant Seoul Metropolitan City, but is not controlled under its control, it cannot be deemed that the defendant

Article 15 of the Labor Standards Act

[Judgment of the court below]

[Defendant-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 others, Counsel for defendant-appellant-appellant

Seoul Central District Court Decision 83Na1984 delivered on February 10, 1984

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.

Since the court below's theory results in the rejection of retirement allowances while working in a public middle school for a multi-year period by interpreting contrary to the precedents of the party members (78Da1530, July 10, 1979) concerning the interpretation of the employer under the Labor Standards Act, the plaintiff is not a labor contract relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City, that is, the plaintiff is employed as the level of the ○○ middle school under the jurisdiction of the defendant. However, if the defendant's voluntary compromise between the plaintiff and the defendant is not a labor contract relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant, the defendant's fostering council, who is an ex officio director upon the delegation of the chairperson's budget for the purpose of maintaining and managing school facilities, has employed the plaintiff as a temporary miscellaneous employee, and the above fostering council was under certain restrictions and supervision for the smooth development of school education from the defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the above fostering council is a voluntary organization under the premise that there is no labor contract relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and therefore the above fostering council's decision is not proper.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kang Jong-young (Presiding Justice)