trực tiếp bóng đá k+Supreme Court Decision 2011Da39946 Decided November 28, 2013 about Wages

Main Issues and Holdings

[1] Whether a worker’s claim to wages arises during industrial action (negative in principle), and whether trực tiếp bóng đá k+ no-work-no-pay principle applies to sabotage (affirmative)

[2] In a case where employer Gap corporation paid deducted wages to workers and full-time labor union officers on ground of sabotage, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ case upholding trực tiếp bóng đá k+ judgment below that Gap may deduct trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount proportionately calculated upon entire estimated sabotage hours per worker, and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ degree of deducting full-time officers’ wage should be based on overall sabotage hours of all union members

[3] Whether workers may claim wages for paid holidays during a strike (negative), and whether trực tiếp bóng đá k+ same legal principle applies to sabotage (affirmative)

Summary of Decision

[1] Unless a collective agreement or employment regulations decide otherwise, or any related practices between trực tiếp bóng đá k+ parties are acknowledged, a worker does not have trực tiếp bóng đá k+ right to claim wages (as trực tiếp bóng đá k+ prime right of a worker in a compensational relation with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ duty to provide labor) during an industrial action in which trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker did not provide any labor due to suspension of his/her prime right and duty such as trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker’s duty to provide labor. It is sufficient to assume that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ no-work-no-pay principle also applies to sabotage as well, since it is an industrial action which partially suspends labor supply by providing incomplete labor.

[2] In a case where employer Gap corporation paid deducted wages to workers and full-time labor union officers on ground of sabotage, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court upheld trực tiếp bóng đá k+ judgment below that it was not unreasonable for Gap to deduct trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount proportionately calculated upon entire estimated sabotage hours per worker, full-time union officers are not exempt from trực tiếp bóng đá k+ same proportion of wage deduction, and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ degree of deducting full-time officers’ wage should be based on overall sabotage hours of all union members.

[3] Holidays in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Labor Standards Act were established so that workers may recover health and enjoy social and cultural life by utilizing leisure time during continuous labor. Furthermore, “paid holiday” refers to a holiday in which pay is guaranteed in line with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ purpose of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ holiday system, so that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker can fully utilize trực tiếp bóng đá k+ holiday; in other words, a day where wage is paid as in normal working days, despite trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker resting that day. In light of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ purpose behind providing holidays and paid holidays in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Labor Standard Act, it is perceivable that special regulations of paid holidays are applied upon trực tiếp bóng đá k+ premise that regular labor relations are maintained; that is, a condition where trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker have provided labor and is expected to provide continuous labor. Since such legal principles on paid holidays are also applied to industrial actions such as strikes, where workers’ major rights and duties such as trực tiếp bóng đá k+ duty to provide labor are suspended and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ right to claim wages does not occur, as in leave of absence, so trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker cannot seek wages for trực tiếp bóng đá k+ paid holidays included in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ strike period. And since such legal principles also apply to sabotages where trực tiếp bóng đá k+ so-work-no-pay principle is applied as in strikes, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker cannot seek wages for paid holidays during trực tiếp bóng đá k+ sabotage period.

Reference Provisions

[1] Article 2 subparag. 6 and Article 44(1) of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act /

[2] Article 2 subparag. 6, Article 24, and Article 44(1) of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act / [3] Article 55 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Labor Standards Act, Article 30 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Enforcement Decree of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Labor Standards Act, Article 44(1) of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act

Article 2 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act (Definitions) trực tiếp bóng đá k+ terms used in this Act shall be defined be as follows: 6. trực tiếp bóng đá k+ term “industrial actions” means actions or counter-actions which obstruct trực tiếp bóng đá k+ normal operation of a business, such as strikes, sabotage, lock-outs, and other activities through which trực tiếp bóng đá k+ parties to labor relations intend to accomplish their claims.

Article 44 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act (Prohibition of Demand for Wages Payment during Period of Industrial Actions) (1) An employer shall have no obligation to pay wages during a period of industrial actions to workers who did not provide labor because of their participation in industrial actions.

Article 24 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act (Full-time Officer of Trade Union) (1) If provided in a collective agreement or consented by employers, workers may be engaged exclusively in affairs of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ trade union without providing trực tiếp bóng đá k+ employer with work specified in their employment contracts.

(2) A worker who is engaged exclusively in affairs of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ trade union pursuant to paragraph (1) (hereinafter referred to as full-time officer) shall not be remunerated in any kind by trực tiếp bóng đá k+ employer during trực tiếp bóng đá k+ period of said exclusive engagement.

(3) An employer shall not restrict lawful trade union activities of full-time officers.

(4) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), where it is prescribed by a collective agreement or consented by an employer, workers may conduct affairs prescribed by this Act or other laws and affairs of maintaining and managing a trade union for trực tiếp bóng đá k+ healthy development of labor-management relations without loss of wages, such as consultation or bargaining with an employer, grievance settlement, or industrial safety activities, within trực tiếp bóng đá k+ maximum time-off limit (hereinafter referred to as “maximum time-off limit”) prescribed by Article 24-2 in consideration of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ number of members, etc. of a trade union by business or by place of business.

(5) A trade union shall not request trực tiếp bóng đá k+ payment of wages, in violation of paragraphs (2) and (4), and shall not take any industrial actions for trực tiếp bóng đá k+ purpose of realization of such intention.

Article 55 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Labor Standards Act (Holidays) An employer shall allow workers at least one paid holiday per week on average.

Article 30 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Enforcement Decree of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Labor Standards Act (Weekly Holidays) trực tiếp bóng đá k+ paid holiday under Article 55 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Labor Standards Act shall be granted to a person who has shown perfect attendance of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ contractual working days during one week.

Reference Cases [1][3] Supreme Court Decision 2007Da73277, Dec. 24, 2009 / [1] Supreme Court en banc Decision 94Da26721, Dec. 21, 1995 (Gong1996Sang, 208)

Plaintiff-Appellant List of Plaintiffs as written on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Separate Sheet (Attorney Kim Cha-gon, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant-Appellee Kyongnam Pharm. Co., Ltd. (JeongSu Law Firm, Attorneys Cheong Gi-jong, et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee)

Judgment of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below Daejeon High Court Decision 2010Na7216 decided April 21, 2011

Disposition All appeals are dismissed. trực tiếp bóng đá k+ costs of appeal are assessed against Plaintiffs

Reasoning Any supplementary appellate brief submitted after trực tiếp bóng đá k+ deadline is considered only to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ extent which it supplements trực tiếp bóng đá k+ grounds for appeal

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

Article 44(1) of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act provides that “an employer shall have no obligation to pay wages during a period of industrial actions to workers who did not provide labor because of their participation in industrial actions,” and Article 2 subparag. 6 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ same Act provides that “trực tiếp bóng đá k+ term “industrial actions” means actions or counter-actions which obstruct trực tiếp bóng đá k+ normal operation of a business, such as strikes, sabotage, lock-outs, and other activities through which trực tiếp bóng đá k+ parties to labor relations intend to accomplish their claims.” And unless a collective agreement or employment regulations decide otherwise, or any related practices between trực tiếp bóng đá k+ parties are acknowledged, a worker does not have trực tiếp bóng đá k+ right to claim wages (as trực tiếp bóng đá k+ prime right of a worker in a compensational relation with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ duty to provide labor) during an industrial action in which trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker did not provide any labor due to suspension of his/her prime right and duty such as trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker’s duty to provide labor (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 94Da26721, Dec. 21, 1995). It is sufficient to assume that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ no-work-no-pay principle also applies to sabotage as well, since it is an industrial action which partially suspends labor supply by providing incomplete labor.

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below was just in determining that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Defendant-employer may cut Plaintiffs’ wages during trực tiếp bóng đá k+ sabotage period under trực tiếp bóng đá k+ aforementioned opinion, and contrary to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ allegations in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ grounds of appeal, there were no errors of misapprehending trực tiếp bóng đá k+ legal principles on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ no-work-no-pay principle in industrial actions.

2. Regarding ground of appeal No. 2

Although Plaintiffs allege that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ calculation of their sabotage period was wrong, this portion of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ ground of appeal is merely an argument concerning trực tiếp bóng đá k+ selective adoption of evidence and acknowledgment of facts, which belongs to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ exclusive right of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ fact-finding court, and thus difficult to be perceived as a legitimate ground of appeal. Furthermore, contrary to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ allegations in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ grounds of appeal, there are no errors of violating trực tiếp bóng đá k+ rules of evidence or mistaking facts due to incomplete trial upon examining trực tiếp bóng đá k+ reasoning of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below in light of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ records.

3. Regarding ground of appeal No. 3

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below acknowledged trực tiếp bóng đá k+ facts in its ruling, then determined that although trực tiếp bóng đá k+ degree of deducting wages during a sabotage period should be calculated by judging trực tiếp bóng đá k+ extent of each worker’s incompleteness in terms of labor supply, unless decided otherwise by collective agreements or employment regulations, Defendant’s act of proportionally calculating all sabotage hours estimated per worker, then deducting trực tiếp bóng đá k+ calculated amount from wages is not irrational, considering trực tiếp bóng đá k+ following circumstances. ① Plaintiffs’ form of labor supply was cooperative work, and due to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ method of such labor, an individual worker’s sabotage directly affects trực tiếp bóng đá k+ productivity of other workers as well. Thus, incompleteness of labor supply can not be calculated per worker, but can only be based on overall productivity decline. ② Sabotage appears to be trực tiếp bóng đá k+ major and only cause for trực tiếp bóng đá k+ decline in production during Plaintiffs’ industrial action, as no other circumstances are apparent. ③ trực tiếp bóng đá k+ incompleteness of supplied labor during trực tiếp bóng đá k+ sabotage period is 100% upon considering trực tiếp bóng đá k+ following: sabotage hours per month which were 20% to 66% of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ total work hours even when based on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ longest sabotage period, 75% to 90% productivity decline during trực tiếp bóng đá k+ period, and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ nature of Plaintiffs’ cooperative work. ④ Deducting trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount calculated as each worker’s sabotaged hour based on wages from total wage is beneficial to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ workers of this case, instead of deducting trực tiếp bóng đá k+ amount calculated as each worker’s sabotaged hour based on productivity decline due to sabotage.

Upon examining trực tiếp bóng đá k+ reasoning of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below in light of records, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below’s determination was just and acceptable, and contrary to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ allegation in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ grounds of appeal, there were no errors of misapprehending trực tiếp bóng đá k+ legal principles on calculating trực tiếp bóng đá k+ degree of incomplete labor supply during a sabotage period.

4. Regarding ground of appeal No. 4

A. A full-time officer of a trade union (hereinafter “full-time officer”) is similar to a worker on leave, since his or her basic labor-management relationship with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ employer as well as his/her worker status are maintained, while being exempt from trực tiếp bóng đá k+ duty to supply labor, which accordingly exempts trực tiếp bóng đá k+ employer from trực tiếp bóng đá k+ duty to pay wages in principle. Therefore, even if trực tiếp bóng đá k+ employer pays a certain amount to a full-time officer in accordance with a collective agreement or etc., it cannot be perceived as wage (see Supreme Court Decisions 94Da54566, Nov. 10, 1995; 97Da54727, Apr. 24, 1998, etc.), and whether trực tiếp bóng đá k+ employer is obliged to pay wages to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ full-time officer should be individually determined upon considering trực tiếp bóng đá k+ details of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ relevant establishment’s collective agreement and other labor-management agreements, or labor-management practices of each case (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do721, Feb. 10, 2011).

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below determined that full-time officers’ (who are trực tiếp bóng đá k+ executives of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ union) claim for full wages when regular union members cannot receive part of their wages in accordance with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ no-work-no-pay principle is unjust in terms of relations with regular union members, since trực tiếp bóng đá k+ collective agreement of this case which provides that “trực tiếp bóng đá k+ corporation will not discriminate full-time officers from union members for their status, and will pay them full-time officer wages; additionally, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ union representative will be paid monthly union activity expenses of 100,000 won, while trực tiếp bóng đá k+ full-time officer will be paid with monthly union activity expenses of 50,000. trực tiếp bóng đá k+ full-time officer’s term will be accounted into trực tiếp bóng đá k+ years of service, and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ officer will suffer no disadvantages for his/her full-time officer status.” was intended to pay a certain amount of wages to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ full-time officer within trực tiếp bóng đá k+ boundaries that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ officer will not be at a disadvantage compared to regular union members who supply labor, so granting more advantages to a full-time officer does not coincide with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ intentions of both labor and management in light of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ purpose of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ aforementioned provision.

Upon examining trực tiếp bóng đá k+ reasoning of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ judgment below in light of aforementioned legal principles and records, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below is just, and contrary to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ allegations in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending trực tiếp bóng đá k+ legal principles on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ employer’s duty to pay wages to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ full-time officer during a sabotage.

B. Furthermore, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below determined that since Plaintiffs 21, 36, and 55 (full-time officers) are exempt from trực tiếp bóng đá k+ duty to provide labor and have received trực tiếp bóng đá k+ same level of wages as regular members in accordance with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ collective agreement, and as wages of regular members are cut due to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ sabotage period, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ above Plaintiffs cannot avoid trực tiếp bóng đá k+ same wage deduction and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ degree of deduction should be calculated by trực tiếp bóng đá k+ average sabotage hours of all union members.

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below’s aforementioned determination is just and acceptable upon considering trực tiếp bóng đá k+ aforementioned circumstances cited by trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below, and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ following circumstances which are acknowledgeable from above legal principles and records: since full-time officers are exempt from trực tiếp bóng đá k+ duty to provide labor, it is initially impossible to calculate trực tiếp bóng đá k+ degree of incomplete labor per officer; trực tiếp bóng đá k+ collective agreement of this case provides that a certain amount of wages are paid to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ full-time officer within trực tiếp bóng đá k+ boundaries that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ officer will not be at a disadvantage compared to regular union members who supply labor; trực tiếp bóng đá k+ purpose of reducing full-time officers’ wages is to balance equity with regular members; in this case, it is difficult to estimate each member’s sabotage hours and even if such estimation is possible, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ deducted amount will vary due to differing sabotage hours, so it is difficult to take their individual deduction rates into consideration when deducting officers’ wages; and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ full-time officers of this case planned and lead trực tiếp bóng đá k+ sabotage. And contrary to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ allegations in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ grounds of appeal, there were no errors affecting trực tiếp bóng đá k+ judgment by misapprehending trực tiếp bóng đá k+ legal principles on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ prohibition against discriminating union members and full-time union officers.

5. Regarding ground of appeal No. 5

Article 55 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Labor Standards Act provides that “an employer shall allow workers at least one paid holiday per week on average,” and Article 30 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Enforcement Decree of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Labor Standards Act provides that “trực tiếp bóng đá k+ paid holiday under Article 55 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Labor Standards Act shall be granted to a person who has shown perfect attendance of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ contractual working days during one week,” thus granting weekly holidays in which trực tiếp bóng đá k+ employee does not have to work at least 1 day in each week. Additionally, national holidays and etc. can be separately determined as paid or unpaid holidays in accordance with collective agreements, employment regulations, and labor contracts.

Holidays in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Labor Standards Act were established so that workers may recover health and enjoy social and cultural life by utilizing leisure time during continuous labor. Furthermore, “paid holiday” refers to a holiday in which pay is guaranteed in line with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ purpose of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ holiday system, so that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker can fully utilize trực tiếp bóng đá k+ holiday; in other words, a day where wage is paid as in normal working days, despite trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker resting that day. In light of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ purpose behind providing holidays and paid holidays in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Labor Standard Act, it is perceivable that special regulations of paid holidays are applied upon trực tiếp bóng đá k+ premise that regular labor relations are maintained; that is, a condition where trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker have provided labor and is expected to provide continuous labor. Since such legal principles on paid holidays are also applied to industrial actions such as strikes, where workers’ major rights and duties such as trực tiếp bóng đá k+ duty to provide labor are suspended and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ right to claim wages does not occur, as in leave of absence, so trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker cannot seek wages for trực tiếp bóng đá k+ paid holidays included in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ strike period (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Da73277, Dec. 24, 2009). And since such legal principles also apply to sabotages where trực tiếp bóng đá k+ so-work-no-pay principle is applied as in strikes, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ worker cannot seek wages for paid holidays during trực tiếp bóng đá k+ sabotage period.

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below was just in determining that Defendant-employer may deduct wages for paid holidays (Article 55 subparag. 1 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ agreement of this case provides that “Saturdays and Sundays are paid holidays,” and Article 58 provides that “every Sunday is trực tiếp bóng đá k+ weekly holiday”) included in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ sabotage period proportionate to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ sabotage hours of each week, regardless of Plaintiffs’ regular attendance. Contrary to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ allegations in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ grounds of appeal, there were no misapprehension of legal principles related to paid holidays.

6. Regarding ground of appeal No. 6

Upon examining trực tiếp bóng đá k+ reasoning of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ judgment below in light of legal principles and records, Defendant promised to pay 650% regular bonuses and 350,000 won-Chuseok bonuses to employees who have worked for more than 4 months (Article 52 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ agreement of this case); each bonus constitutes wage as remuneration for labor, since their amount is decided and are continuously and regularly paid at trực tiếp bóng đá k+ time provided by trực tiếp bóng đá k+ collective agreement; and in principle, wages are not paid during industrial actions; so trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below was just in determining that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ employer is not obliged to pay bonuses for trực tiếp bóng đá k+ calculation period which corresponds to sabotage hours. Contrary to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ allegations in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending trực tiếp bóng đá k+ legal principles on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ no-work-no-pay principle or labor practices, or by violating trực tiếp bóng đá k+ rules of evidence.

7. Regarding ground of appeal No. 7

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below determined that Plaintiffs’ attendance at trực tiếp bóng đá k+ extraordinary general meeting and briefing for business sell-off held without Defendant’s approval does not constitute “act which corresponds to on-duty at work” provided by Article 52 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ collective agreement, based on trực tiếp bóng đá k+ following grounds: Article 8 of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ agreement of this case provides that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ company must acknowledge hours and days which union members do not work in order to attend “annual general assemblies (when trực tiếp bóng đá k+ labor union assembles an extraordinary general assembly)” (subparag. 1) and “educational programs and events held by trực tiếp bóng đá k+ union and other umbrella organizations (should be held after reaching an agreement with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ company)” (subparag. 6), and count such hours as hours on-duty at work; yet despite such provisions, trực tiếp bóng đá k+ union cannot hold general assemblies or educational programs arbitrarily and without negotiating with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ company, so it is difficult to assume that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ collectives agreement guarantees Plaintiffs with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ rights to attend such meetings or programs even when Defendant disagrees with them.

trực tiếp bóng đá k+ aforementioned determination of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ court below is just and acceptable in light of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ above circumstances and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ following circumstances which can be derived from related legal principles and records: Defendant approved trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Jul. 10, 2007 extraordinary general meeting which was requested as a vote for determining whether to go into industrial action, allowing a limitation of 2 hours in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ morning; trực tiếp bóng đá k+ agreement provides that “educational programs and events held by trực tiếp bóng đá k+ union and other umbrella organizations” such as sell-off briefings can be held only after reaching an agreement with trực tiếp bóng đá k+ company; trực tiếp bóng đá k+ sell-off related briefing session and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ Jul. 11, 2007, sell-off briefing in which trực tiếp bóng đá k+ union planned to assemble all members will use trực tiếp bóng đá k+ entire afternoon hours, and 3 days of sell-off briefings to all union members is likely to considerably disturb Defendant’s business; trực tiếp bóng đá k+ meeting and briefing could have taken place outside trực tiếp bóng đá k+ company and in non-working hours, and without Defendant’s approval; and no data indicates that trực tiếp bóng đá k+ purpose of trực tiếp bóng đá k+ meeting or briefing could not be accomplished if they were not held on time. Contrary to trực tiếp bóng đá k+ allegations in trực tiếp bóng đá k+ grounds of appeal, there were no errors of misapprehending trực tiếp bóng đá k+ legal principles on interpreting trực tiếp bóng đá k+ collective agreement.

8. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and trực tiếp bóng đá k+ costs of appeal are assessed against trực tiếp bóng đá k+ defeated party. It is decided as per Disposition by trực tiếp bóng đá k+ assent of all participating Justices.

[Attachement] List of Plaintiffs: omitted

Justices

Kim So-young (Presiding Justice)

Shin Young-chul

Lee Sang-hoon (Justice in charge)

Kim Yong-deok