beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Daejeon High Court.
The plaintiffs.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. The Plaintiffs’ ground of appeal and the Defendant’s ground of appeal No. 2 pertaining to work hours refer to the hours during which an employee provides labor under an employment contract under the direction and supervision of the employer, and recess hours refer to the hours during which an employee may freely use as a result of dismissal from the employer’s direction and supervision during work hours.
Therefore, even if a worker does not actually engage in the work during the working hours, it is not guaranteed to the worker free use, but if the worker is actually under the direction and supervision of the employer, it should be deemed that the work hours are included in the working hours.
It is not uniformly determined depending on the type of specific type of business or work, whether the break time or WIG hours specified in the labor contract belong to working hours or recess hours.
This ought to be specifically determined on an individual case basis based on various circumstances, including the content of the labor contract, rules of employment and collective agreement applicable to the relevant workplace, the details of the work provided by the employee, the specific work method in the relevant workplace, whether the employee interferes with or supervises the employee in the workplace, whether the employer has been able to freely use the place, whether there are circumstances that may interfere with the actual rest of the employee or recognize the employer’s direction and supervision
(Supreme Court Decision 2014Da74254 Decided December 5, 2017). The lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, determined that the break time assigned pursuant to Article 51(2) of the instant collective agreement (10 minutes that were given to three or more hours of overtime work and two or more hours of overtime work) does not constitute working hours, on the other hand, on the ground that workers do not have any guarantee of free use, such as that it is difficult for them to view that they do not deviate from the Defendant’s command and order