logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.04.12 2016나2082660
임금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant were established around December 29, 1965 and run passenger transport business, etc. using buses with approximately 240 regular workers. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant around September 8, 2010 and served as an urban bus driver.

B. On July 30, 2014, the Defendant held a disciplinary committee’s 25th disciplinary action against the Plaintiff on July 30, 2014, and decided on the suspension of work 10 days on June 16, 2014. The Plaintiff requested a review on the above disciplinary action on August 7, 2014. On October 31, 2014, the Defendant again held a disciplinary committee’s 10-day disciplinary action against the Plaintiff on June 16, 2015 (hereinafter “15-day disciplinary action”). However, the Defendant again rejected the Plaintiff’s request for a review on July 25, 2015 (hereinafter “20-day disciplinary action”). The Defendant again rejected the Plaintiff’s request for a review on the grounds that it would have been subject to a new review on November 10, 2014, and the Defendant again rejected the Plaintiff’s request for a new review on the grounds that it would have been subject to a new review on the same date (hereinafter “15-day”).

The Plaintiff’s second disciplinary action on July 9, 2015.

arrow