(영문) 대전고등법원(청주) 2020.06.16 2019나2330

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) 대전고등법원(청주) 2020.06.16 2019나2330

해고무효확인 및 주권인도 등

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation in this part is as stated in Paragraph 1 of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the case where the part on “work” under Paragraph 3 of the judgment of the first instance is used as “work limit”, and therefore, it is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

An abbreviationd name established in the judgment of the first instance is also used below the same.

2. The reasoning of the judgment of the court concerning the claim for wage payment is stated in this part of the judgment of the court of first instance.

Except for the cases where the part of paragraph (3) (No. 9, No. 13, No. 16, No. 16, of the first instance judgment) is used as follows, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary dismissal] The relevant legal principles are justified in cases where there are grounds for an employee's responsibility to the extent that the employee's employment relationship cannot be continued under the social norms. Whether the employee's employment relationship with the relevant employee has reached the degree that it is impossible for him/her to continue under the social norms shall comprehensively examine various circumstances, including the purpose and nature of the relevant employer, the conditions of the relevant workplace, the status and the job in charge, the motive and background of the relevant employee's act of misconduct, the influence of the act of misconduct on the company's business order such as the risk of disturbing the company's deceptive order, the previous attitude of work, etc. If there are various kinds of suspicions of disciplinary action against the worker, it shall not be determined with only one of the grounds for disciplinary action or some of them, but shall be determined in light of the overall reasons. Even if the disciplinary action does not constitute a ground for disciplinary action, it may be considered as materials for consideration when taking into account a disciplinary action.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da21962 Decided March 24, 2011, etc.). 2016.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

참조판례

-대법원 2011. 3. 24. 선고 2010다21962 판결

유사 판례

-대구고등법원 2020.08.19 2020나20457

-대법원 2015.12.10 2015다219160

-서울고등법원 2017.08.23 2017누30667

-대법원 2015.12.23 2014다52582

-대전고등법원 2017.09.14 2016누13623