logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.02.07 2019노2954
근로기준법위반
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case, although the Defendant modified the rules of employment containing 300% per annum of bonus, which was already applied at the instant workplace on December 31, 2017, at a disadvantage to the employees and did not obtain a collective consent of the majority of the employees, on the ground that the court below acquitted the employees of the facts charged in this case. The judgment of the court below erred by misapprehending the

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is the representative of the Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan Government Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., which is an employer who runs metal processing business by employing 41 full time workers.

With respect to the preparation or modification of the rules of employment, the employer shall hear opinions of a trade union if any labor union organized by a majority of workers at the business or workplace concerned, and of a majority of workers if no trade union exists

Provided, That consent shall be obtained when the rules of employment are modified disadvantageous to workers.

Nevertheless, on December 31, 2017, the Defendant revised the rules of employment containing 300% per annum of bonuses applied to the previous workplace at the same workplace at a disadvantage to the employees, and did not obtain a written consent of a majority of the employees.

B. As to the above facts charged, the lower court held that the labor-management council consisting of the employer and the representative of the employee of the instant company, around December 15, 2017, held an explanatory meeting on the amendment of the Rules of Employment and passed a resolution to obtain consent from the entire employees. On December 31, 2017, the employer provided explanation on the amendment of the Rules of Employment in the instant case during the presence of the former employee, and obtained consent on the amendment of the Rules of Employment from the entire employee after having the time for responding to inquiries.

arrow