logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.03.20 2013가합14298
퇴직금 등
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 50,891,574 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from May 15, 2012 to March 20, 2014.

Reasons

1. Under the underlying facts, facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by taking into account the whole purport of the pleadings as stated in the evidence Nos. 3-1, 2, 4, 5-1, 3, 6, 7, and 1-2.

Around June 15, 1989, Defendant Federation is a juristic person established independently by the Korean Federation of Passenger Transport Business Cooperatives (hereinafter “Tax Association”) consisting of corporations, taxis and private taxi transport business associations throughout the country. The relevant Acts and subordinate statutes were amended in the course that the taxi association operated a mutual aid business for private taxi and private taxi through its affiliated taxi mutual aid associations, and Defendant Federation was granted permission for mutual aid business around July 21, 1992. Since February 1, 1993, Defendant Federation directly performed mutual aid business for private taxi through the mutual aid association affiliated with Defendant Federation.

B. In order to carry out mutual aid affairs, Defendant Federation requested the Federation to separate the business related to private taxi (individual branch) managed by the mutual aid association under its jurisdiction. Accordingly, on January 29, 1993, the agreement was concluded between Defendant Federation and the taxi federation on the “transfer of five individual branch offices”. Accordingly, five individual branch offices among the taxi federation were comprehensively transferred to the mutual aid association of Defendant Federation.

C. Accordingly, from February 1, 1993 to February 1, 1993, the positions of employees working in the individual branch of the taxi federation, including the Plaintiff, were changed to the jurisdiction of the defendant federation regardless of their employees’ will. There was no separate entry procedures, office, class, or work change in the process.

The employees of the above individual branch office around that time requested from the taxi federation and the defendant federation to submit a resignation letter, and around February 26, 1993, the above five individual branch offices transferred to the above five individual branch offices.

arrow