logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2020.09.18 2019가합106690
해고무효확인
Text

Of the instant lawsuits, the part regarding the invalidity of the suspension disposition on May 11, 2018 shall be dismissed.

The plaintiff's remaining claims are all filed.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is a company that establishes a contact center and acts as an agent for the defendant. The plaintiff is a worker who joined and works for the defendant on May 1, 2012 and submitted a resignation notice on October 6, 2018.

B. Around March 26, 2018, the Plaintiff was the Defendant’s employee (1) and on or around March 2018, C retired from the office was informed of the Defendant’s personnel team, and around May 2012, the head of the integrated operation business division D of the Defendant’s sexual harassment committed against the Plaintiff. At the time of the aforementioned information, the Plaintiff, the head of the personnel team of the Defendant, from March 27, 2018, conducted an investigation, such as talking with D regarding the said information, but C requested C to be excluded from the investigation by asserting the Plaintiff as the perpetrator of separate sexual harassment case and requesting C to exclude the Plaintiff from the investigation. On March 28, 2018, the Defendant had the Plaintiff discontinue the investigation. On March 30, 2018, the Defendant’s E-management diagnosis team, a related company of the Defendant, conducted an investigation into sexual harassment and additional sexual harassment against the Plaintiff, and the results of the investigation into the Defendants’ sexual harassment reported on the instant report.

3) The case of false investigation into B sexual harassment states that “the Plaintiff was in charge of investigation into sexual harassment case while investigating the case of sexual harassment against D, it was confirmed that the Plaintiff violated the criteria and principles of internal investigation (the confidentiality of a reporter, the duty to protect victims of sexual harassment, and the limitation on the victim’s access).” 4) The case of B sexual harassment case, “the Plaintiff,” attended a meeting held at a restaurant near B pressure-gu Center at around March 19, 2017, and attended the meeting ceremony at around March 19, 2017, and brought F losses to the Plaintiff’s face. However, the Plaintiff’s assertion that it was F.

arrow