택시기사가 의도적으로 현저하게 평균임금을 높인 사안에서 평균임금의 산정 방법 ― 대법원 2009.10.15. 선고 2007다72519 판결 판례 평석 ― (The Calculation Method of Average Wage in the case for Taxi Driver to make Average Wage high intentionally and remarkably)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 서울대학교노동법연구회
· 수록지 정보 : 노동법연구 / 28호 / 1 ~ 29페이지
· 저자명 : 김홍영

초록

The Supreme Court(2007da2519) decided that the average wage, in the Case for taxi driver to Make average wage High Intentionally and Remarkably, for increase his retirement payment as believed, should not be calculated the wage as it is, during 3 months before and except the period for him to make it high intentionally and remarkably, but to be calculated the wage part, exceeding the money which he has to turn over to the company out of his daily earning, and during 3 months before and except the period for him to make its part high intentionally and remarkably, by the way to multiply his part by rate of increase in comparison with other drivers during the period of intentional and remarkable increase, and the wage part others as it is, during 3 months before retirement.
The Supreme Court's rule is more rationally than the previous cases, but do not resolve the problems of the previous cases clearly.
We can reconfirm, to review this case, that (1) the standards to judge remarkable increase of case law is vogue, and (2) the grounds to be present by the courts for intentional increase are uncertain.
So to apply the case law, which except the period to make average wage high intentionally and remarkably, the courts should be more cautious.

영어초록

The Supreme Court(2007da2519) decided that the average wage, in the Case for taxi driver to Make average wage High Intentionally and Remarkably, for increase his retirement payment as believed, should not be calculated the wage as it is, during 3 months before and except the period for him to make it high intentionally and remarkably, but to be calculated the wage part, exceeding the money which he has to turn over to the company out of his daily earning, and during 3 months before and except the period for him to make its part high intentionally and remarkably, by the way to multiply his part by rate of increase in comparison with other drivers during the period of intentional and remarkable increase, and the wage part others as it is, during 3 months before retirement.
The Supreme Court's rule is more rationally than the previous cases, but do not resolve the problems of the previous cases clearly.
We can reconfirm, to review this case, that (1) the standards to judge remarkable increase of case law is vogue, and (2) the grounds to be present by the courts for intentional increase are uncertain.
So to apply the case law, which except the period to make average wage high intentionally and remarkably, the courts should be more cautious.

참고자료

· 없음