logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.03.09 2016구합65244
부당전보구제재심판정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that employs 7,700 full-time workers and operates textile, industrial materials, chemistry, heavy industry, construction and trade parts business, etc., each business sector is divided into PG (PG) and each PU is established under each PG. Specifically, there are textile, industrial materialsPG, chemical, construction, heavy industryPG, construction, tradePG, and information and communications PG under the Middle Heavy IndustriesPG.

B. On January 1, 1997, the Intervenor was dismissed from the position of the team leader on March 2, 2015 while serving as the planning and management team leader of the Heavy Industries PPG's PPU as a member of the Plaintiff on January 1, 1997, and was issued a transfer order (hereinafter “instant transfer order”) with the small and medium industry PPG power plant management team on August 1, 2015.

C. On October 26, 2015, the Intervenor asserted that the instant transfer order was unfair transfer, and filed an application for remedy with Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission (Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission) No. 2015da2743.

On December 21, 2015, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission continued to serve as a team member after the cancellation of the position of the team leader among the workers belonging to the Plaintiff, and decided to recognize the instant transfer order as unfair transfer and return the Intervenor to the Plaintiff, on the ground that the need for the instant transfer order is not recognized, in view of the fact that the Intervenor did not request the transfer of the relevant career person, such as the Intervenor, from among the workers belonging to the Plaintiff, and that the Intervenor did not receive the assigned duties for at least two months after the transfer to the Sejong Factory.

On January 21, 2016, the Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the above initial inquiry tribunal, filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission by 2016da74.

The National Labor Relations Commission, on April 21, 2016, did not recognize the need to issue the instant transfer order, in view of the fact that there is no ground to deem that the Intervenor’s work performed in the Initial PPU was reduced, and that it is difficult to believe that the Intervenor requested the same planning career person as the Intervenor at the Sejong Factory.

arrow