logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.09.14 2016가합23386
해고무효확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's primary claim and conjunctive claim against the main defendant are all dismissed.

2. Preliminary defendant.

Reasons

In fact, the conjunctive defendant is a company engaged in the sale of housing units and the sale agency business, and the primary defendant is an employee of the conjunctive defendant and the limited liability company D (hereinafter referred to as "D"), who comprehensively manages the business, and the plaintiff is a person employed by the conjunctive defendant on January 25, 2016 and worked as an office worker.

On January 2016, the preliminary defendant announced employment on the employment information website with the following contents:

The types of occupation and recruitment of certified judicial scrivener officers and relevant occupational categories: Division with legal knowledge, including division with basic knowledge of entering into contracts and civil and criminal litigations, division with experience in the office of a certified judicial scrivener: Employment contract and wage conditions without a fixed period: at least 2,00,000 won per month, bonus at least 0% (including annual salary or monthly salary), and other preferential treatment conditions for at least one year: Graduate (4 years): At least 09: 0:0-18:00 on the ordinary day, five days per week, and prescribed working hours: 40 hours per week, and 10-100 on January 20, 2016, the Plaintiff submitted an application form for entry to preliminary Defendant on his/her e-mail with a fixed period of time: 10-10,000 won, and 20-10,0000 won for each of the following months: 20-10,000 won for each of the following reasons:

In addition to the sale and lease business of the E commercial buildings in Ulsan-gu E and the sales agency business of the apartment buildings in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gun G, the Plaintiff performed the management business of the E commercial buildings according to the direction of the principal defendant.

On the wind that the primary defendant instructs E to continue the commercial management of E, the conflict between the plaintiff and the primary defendant arises as a problem of division of work.

On April 18, 2016, the primary defendant ordered the plaintiff to manage the E's commercial buildings, and "I will accept two different copies of a letter by deeming that there is a problem in the capacity if I fail to arrange until this week."

arrow