logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2016.01.28 2012두15821
단체협약시정명령취소
Text

All appeals are dismissed.

Costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. Plaintiff’s ground of appeal

A. As to the assertion regarding the misapprehension of legal principles regarding the provision on the daily negotiating party at the time of the original adjudication, Articles 5 and 29(1) of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act (amended by Act No. 9930, Jan. 1, 2010; hereinafter “Trade Union Act”) guarantee the workers’ freedom to join and the right to collective bargaining, but Article 7(1) of the Addenda of the Trade Union Act prohibits the establishment of a new trade union, which is the same as the trade union and its organization, until June 30, 2011.

As such, the term “where a trade union is organized in a business or workplace” in which the establishment of multiple trade unions is prohibited refers to the case where a single business or workplace has already a company-level trade union or has the ability to independently conduct collective bargaining and collective agreements, and the primary business-level trade union or a branch of a unit trade union by industry and business type which can be seen as equivalent to a company-level

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 2010Ma1193, May 6, 2011). Meanwhile, barring any special circumstance, a disposal document, such as a collective agreement, ought to be acknowledged as having expressed its intent in the collective agreement.

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Da86287 Decided February 13, 2014, etc.). According to the language and text, the lower court held that “only the Plaintiff, who directly concluded a collective agreement with an employer, as an industrial unit trade union, is the sole labor organization that allows collective bargaining, and any other labor organization does not recognize,” the provision of the instant flexible negotiating party (Article 1 of the Organization Convention) infringes on the workers’ right to organize and join the labor union and the right to collective bargaining.

arrow