[Unfair Dismissal Favorable Outcome Case After a Busan Legal Consultation] The Case of a Client Who Obtained a Remedy Application After a Busan Legal Consultation

The situation of the client who received a Busan legal consultation was as follows.

The client got into a dispute with a coworker, with whom the client had usually been on good terms, over a work-related matter.

After that, the coworker persistently followed the client and watched the client's words and conduct, and began reporting the client to the company whenever the client made a small mistake.

As reports accumulated, the client was referred to the disciplinary committee on grounds such as workplace sexual harassment, workplace harassment, and neglect of duty, and received a dismissal, a serious disciplinary measure.

Having received a dismissal from a company where the client had worked diligently for 30 years without any disciplinary history, the client felt the outcome was unfair and, while searching for a way to obtain relief, visited Daeryun.

When requesting the attorney's help, the client gathered and submitted materials to rebut the matters that had been reported.

The statutes related to unfair dismissal litigation are set out in the Labor Standards Act.

• Article 28 (Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal, etc.) (1) If an employer subjects a worker to unfair dismissal or the like, the worker may apply to the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy.

(2) The application for remedy under paragraph (1) shall be filed within three months from the date on which the unfair dismissal, etc. occurred.

• Article 29 (Investigation, etc.) (1) Upon receiving an application for remedy under Article 28, the Labor Relations Commission shall conduct the necessary investigation without delay and shall examine the parties concerned.

(2) When conducting an examination under paragraph (1), the Labor Relations Commission may, upon the request of a party concerned or on its own authority, summon a witness to appear and ask questions on necessary matters.

(3) When conducting an examination under paragraph (1), the Labor Relations Commission shall give the parties concerned sufficient opportunity to submit evidence and to cross-examine witnesses.

(4) The detailed procedures for the investigation and examination by the Labor Relations Commission under paragraph (1) shall be determined by the National Labor Relations Commission (hereinafter referred to as the "National Labor Relations Commission") under the "Labor Relations Commission Act".

• Article 30 (Remedy Order, etc.) (1) After concluding the examination under Article 29, if the Labor Relations Commission finds that an unfair dismissal or the like has been established, it shall issue a remedy order to the employer; if it finds that an unfair dismissal or the like has not been established, it shall issue a decision dismissing the application for remedy.

(2) The determination, remedy order, and dismissal decision under paragraph (1) shall each be notified in writing to the employer and the worker.

(3) When issuing a remedy order under paragraph (1) (referring only to a remedy order for dismissal), if the worker does not wish to be reinstated to the original position, the Labor Relations Commission may, in lieu of ordering reinstatement, order the employer to pay the worker an amount equal to or greater than the wages the worker could have received had the worker provided work during the dismissal period.

(4) Even where reinstatement (in cases other than dismissal, restoration to the original state) of the worker is impossible due to expiration of the employment contract period, arrival of the retirement age, or the like, the Labor Relations Commission shall issue a remedy order or dismissal decision under paragraph (1).

In such a case, if the Labor Relations Commission finds that an unfair dismissal or the like has been established, it may order the employer to pay the worker an amount equal to the wages the worker could have received had the worker provided work during the dismissal period (in cases other than dismissal, an amount equivalent to restoration to the original state).

The first strategy emphasized in the Busan legal consultation was to point out that the disciplinary committee had made its determination based on the other party's one-sided claims.

Pointing out that the committee had confirmed only the other party's reports without verifying the specific facts and had imposed the measure without hearing the client's account,

the attorney argued in the application for remedy that this one-sided claim by the other party should be rebutted and that the determination should be made after appropriately hearing both parties' arguments.

The second strategy emphasized in the Busan legal consultation was to make use of the other party's claim of neglect of duty. The other party argued that the client's work conduct was poor, but

the attorney demonstrated, by submitting materials in the remedy application procedure, that the client had never been disciplined in connection with work conduct during decades of employment,

and argued that the client was, on the contrary, a worker who had served the company diligently.

The third strategy emphasized in the Busan legal consultation was to argue that the other party was the wrongdoer. In the remedy application procedure, the attorney argued that the other party had persistently followed and monitored the client,

and emphasized that the client had suffered psychological stress as a result. The attorney also submitted, as evidence, records of the psychiatric treatment the client had received.

This was a client who received a Busan legal consultation and, with an attorney's help, obtained a remedy order for unfair dismissal against the company.

After receiving an unfair dismissal notice, the client filed a remedy application and obtained a favorable result.

An employer may dismiss a worker, but it is required to have a just cause and to follow the proper procedure. If it does not, the dismissal becomes unfair.

A worker who has been unfairly dismissed may file a corresponding remedy application. A consultation with a professional is necessary before filing a remedy application.

Because the method of a remedy application can vary depending on the grounds for which a worker was dismissed, it is advisable to obtain a consultation tailored to your situation and the assistance of a professional suited to it.

If, like this client, you wish to file a remedy application against a company after an unfair dismissal, please visit Daeryun Law Firm for assistance.