logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2014.10.30 2014누11081
부당해고구제재심판정취소
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit shall be the cost of supplementary participation.

Reasons

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The party status 1) The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”)

(2) On September 1, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into an employment contract with the Intervenor and received notice from the Intervenor on June 25, 2013 to the effect that he/she would be dismissed from office as a member on June 30, 2013 while the Intervenor was working as a regional university for the B campus.

B. On September 1, 2011, the Plaintiff received a letter of appointment from the Intervenor. The said letter of appointment states that “The period: from September 1, 2011 to August 31, 2014.” 2) The Plaintiff received a letter of appointment on September 1, 2011 and submitted a letter of resignation (hereinafter “instant letter of resignation”) to the Intervenor on June 30, 2013, stating that “I will resign due to personal reasons as of June 30, 2013” (hereinafter “instant letter of resignation”).

3) After that, the Plaintiff requested the return of the written resignation to the head of the Intervenor on March 15, 2013, around March 22, 2013, around April 16, 2013, and on the grounds that the written resignation of this case is null and void, the Plaintiff notified the Intervenor of the terms of office up to August 31, 2014 stated in the written resignation. On May 9, 2013, and around June 17, 2013, the Intervenor notified the Intervenor that the written resignation is null and void or withdrawn on the ground that the written resignation is a discriminatory measure. 4) On June 25, 2013, the Intervenor notified the Plaintiff of the removal of the terms that the position was exempted by KRW 30, June 30, 2013.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant dismissal notice”). C.

On July 26, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant dismissal notice constituted unfair dismissal, and filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission (Seoul 2013rd Sea 2120) (Seoul 2013rd Sea 2120), and the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission September 16, 2013.

arrow