통상임금소송에서 신의칙 적용 판단에 관한 최근 판결의 태도와 평가 — 대상판결: 시영운수사건 대법원 2019. 2. 14. 선고 2015다217287 판결을 중심으로 — (The Attitude and Evaluation of Recent Judgments with respect to the Application of the Good Faith Principle in the Ordinary Wage Lawsuits)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국비교노동법학회
· 수록지 정보 : 노동법논총 / 45권 / 253 ~ 280페이지
· 저자명 : 김희성, 조영길

초록

Recently, the judgment of the Supreme Court(Supreme Court Decision 2015Da217287 delivered on Feb. 14, 2019) Sebsequent lower court decisions that present supplementary theories on the Supreme Court(Kia motors case Second level judgment: Seoul High Court Decision 2017Na28858 delivered on Feb. 22, 2019, 2017Na2058046) on the ‘Siyoung Transportation Company case’stipulated the principle of limiting the application of good faith that was not explained on the Supreme Court’s unanimous judgment on December 18, 2013 and occurred on the case that the application of good faith is completely excluded.
The judgment intends to explain that it prioritized the enforcement of the Labor Standards Act over special circumstances such as “causing serious management difficulties or threatening the existence of a company” and excluded the principle of good faith. In brief, these results seriously infringe the legal stability and protection of trust underlying the law and order and inevitably destroy the entire law and order.
The main reason for this confusion is that the judgment of the Supreme Court on the Siyoung Transportation Company case has misinterpreted ‘the criteria for the application of the principle of good faith in the case of violating the mandatory provisions’ that the Supreme Court’s unanimous judgment (Majority opinions)suggested on the case of additional statutory allowance or applied the contrary legal principle. Furthermore, it has the problem that the specific case has serious and unjust consequences that are not appropriate for reality.
The judgment of the Supreme Court on the‘Siyoung Transportation Company case that does not follow the Supreme Court’s unanimous judgment as well as has the fundamental understanding with a financial statement provokes the further confusion in a number of ordinary wage lawsuits currently pending in courts.
One shall expect that the Supreme Court shall understand correctly and legitimately the three general requirements and four special circumstances for the application of the principle of good faith in the case of violating the mandatory provisions and enhance the legal stability through establishing the explicit, definitive, and unified legal judgment standards and terminating the mass confusion that is taking place in the ordinary wage lawsuits.

영어초록

Recently, the judgment of the Supreme Court(Supreme Court Decision 2015Da217287 delivered on Feb. 14, 2019) Sebsequent lower court decisions that present supplementary theories on the Supreme Court(Kia motors case Second level judgment: Seoul High Court Decision 2017Na28858 delivered on Feb. 22, 2019, 2017Na2058046) on the ‘Siyoung Transportation Company case’stipulated the principle of limiting the application of good faith that was not explained on the Supreme Court’s unanimous judgment on December 18, 2013 and occurred on the case that the application of good faith is completely excluded.
The judgment intends to explain that it prioritized the enforcement of the Labor Standards Act over special circumstances such as “causing serious management difficulties or threatening the existence of a company” and excluded the principle of good faith. In brief, these results seriously infringe the legal stability and protection of trust underlying the law and order and inevitably destroy the entire law and order.
The main reason for this confusion is that the judgment of the Supreme Court on the Siyoung Transportation Company case has misinterpreted ‘the criteria for the application of the principle of good faith in the case of violating the mandatory provisions’ that the Supreme Court’s unanimous judgment (Majority opinions)suggested on the case of additional statutory allowance or applied the contrary legal principle. Furthermore, it has the problem that the specific case has serious and unjust consequences that are not appropriate for reality.
The judgment of the Supreme Court on the‘Siyoung Transportation Company case that does not follow the Supreme Court’s unanimous judgment as well as has the fundamental understanding with a financial statement provokes the further confusion in a number of ordinary wage lawsuits currently pending in courts.
One shall expect that the Supreme Court shall understand correctly and legitimately the three general requirements and four special circumstances for the application of the principle of good faith in the case of violating the mandatory provisions and enhance the legal stability through establishing the explicit, definitive, and unified legal judgment standards and terminating the mass confusion that is taking place in the ordinary wage lawsuits.

참고자료

· 없음