logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2012.07.05 2011구합30656
부당해고구제재심판정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On January 13, 2011, the disciplinary day of the company director-general meeting, including the Plaintiff’s duties in charge of manufacturing and distributing herb drugs, using ten full-time workers at the time of the decision on reexamination, disciplinary procedures cannot be deemed to be a violation of the disciplinary procedure even if the Plaintiff did not provide the Plaintiff with an opportunity to defend himself/herself, and the part of the grounds for disciplinary action among the employees of the company cannot be deemed to be a violation of the disciplinary procedure, even if the Plaintiff did not provide the Plaintiff with an opportunity to defend himself/herself at the time of the dismissal of the instant case, since there were no relevant provisions, such as the rules of employment, such as the rules of employment, which were newly established at the time of the dismissal of the instant case, such as the type of objection, abuse of authority, the abuse of authority, and the recognition of the right to discipline the honorary director-general meeting of the company, and it cannot be deemed that there were no grounds for dispute as to the dismissal of the instant case.

2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) at the Intervenor’s first temporary general meeting, the Intervenor resolved on the dismissal agenda for the Plaintiff, who is an internal director, but the board of directors did not have resolved on the said agenda in advance.

Therefore, the resolution of the above general meeting of shareholders and the dismissal of this case made pursuant thereto shall not be effective against the articles of incorporation.

(2) The grounds for disciplinary action against the Plaintiff are not recognized, such as the type of objection, abuse of authority, failure of honor of the company, and inappropriate management of employees. However, even if such grounds for disciplinary action are recognized, dismissal of the Plaintiff would be excessively excessive and abuse the authority of disciplinary discretion.

(3) Ultimately, the instant dismissal disposition constitutes an unfair dismissal, even though it constitutes an unfair dismissal.

arrow