1. It is confirmed that the Defendant’s retirement disposition against the Plaintiff on March 28, 2019 against the Plaintiff is invalid.

2. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

Basic Facts

A. The Defendant is a company running marine transportation business, etc., and the Plaintiff is a person who joined the Defendant around April 2015 and served as a three-class engineer.

B. From February 2017, the Plaintiff had been on board the Defendant C and had been on duty. As long as the Plaintiff appeared on April 24, 2017, there were symptoms, such as that the Plaintiff’s crypted, and attempted self-harm on May 7, 2017, the symptoms have deteriorated.

On May 12, 2017, the Plaintiff left Singapore and received hospitalization treatment at a local hospital of Singapore, and was diagnosed in detail as a result of his/her return to Korea and as a result, was hospitalized in the hospital from May 27, 2017, and was hospitalized in the hospital and was still unable to return to work thereafter.

C. On March 28, 2019, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a notice on retirement to the effect that “The Plaintiff is in the state of issuing a leave of absence from three months of death or injury (from May 13, 2017 to August 12, 2017) and from November 1, 2017 to February 1, 2018, the period of leave of absence has expired for three months on February 1, 2018. According to Article 2.7.6(1) of the Rules of Employment, a maritime employee was required to submit the documents of reinstatement before the expiration of the period of leave of absence, but the Plaintiff was not required to receive continuous medical care for the treatment of injury or injury, and thus, it is impossible to recover from his/her position without extending his/her labor contract pursuant to Article 2.7.6(2) of the Rules of Employment.”

(hereinafter “instant retirement disposition”). [This case’s retirement disposition’s ground for recognition] does not dispute, each entry of Gap’s 1 through 5, Eul’s 1 through 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the legal principles pertaining to the determination of the claim for confirmation of invalidity of the entire purport of the pleading stipulate the occurrence of a cause as a reason for his/her ipso facto dismissal and disciplinary action, and if the procedure is different from ordinary dismissal and disciplinary action, the reason for ipso facto retirement is labor relations such as the worker’s death, retirement age, expiration of the term