[Asia Economy Reporter Seongpil Cho] A court has ruled that the unilateral contract termination notice given by the residents' representative meeting to a security guard who had an argument with residents over apartment exterior cleaning constitutes unfair dismissal.
According to the legal community on the 1st, the Seoul Administrative Court Administrative Division 14 (Presiding Judge Sanghoon Lee) ruled against the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by the residents' representative meeting of Apartment A in Yongsan-gu, Seoul, seeking to cancel the unfair dismissal relief judgment issued by the Central Labor Relations Commission chairman. The court stated, "There is insufficient reason to consider that the residents' representative meeting had a rational basis for refusing to renew the security guard's employment contract, and there is no other evidence to support this."
Previously, Mr. B and others had signed fixed-term employment contracts and worked as security guards at Apartment A from January to June last year. In May last year, one month before the contract expiration, Mr. B had an argument with a resident who requested cleaning outside the apartment, and the residents' representative meeting notified the contract expiration one week after the incident. Mr. B and others claimed that the notice was unfair dismissal and applied for relief at the local labor relations commission. The local commission ruled in favor of Mr. B and the other security guards, and when the residents' representative meeting's appeal to the Central Labor Relations Commission was dismissed, they filed an administrative lawsuit.
The court found no illegality in the Central Labor Relations Commission's ruling that deemed the dismissal unfair. The court stated, "Mr. B and others have a legitimate expectation of contract renewal, and it is difficult to assess that the argument with the resident over the apartment exterior cleaning was solely attributable to Mr. B."
The residents' representative meeting argued that Mr. B and others had multiple conflicts with residents and complaints beyond the exterior cleaning issue. However, the court judged, "The submitted 'Confirmation of Facts Regarding Complaints, etc.' was merely prepared retrospectively after the plaintiff applied for a rehearing at the Central Labor Relations Commission, recalling past events," and "there is insufficient evidence to conclude that conflicts with residents were adequately proven."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
