파견과 다른 형태의 제3자 관련 노무공급에 관한 구별기준과 법적 문제

Distinction Criteria and Legal Issues on Dispatch and Labor Supply of Other Forms in relation to Third Parties

After the dispatch law was enacted, the issue of disguised subcontracts and illegal dispatch became a big issue in our society and there was a fierce debate about them. In addition, there are many forms of employment relations involving workers and third parties. A lawsuit has been filed against these issues, and the Supreme Court has issued various types of rulings concerning this. The Supreme Court has recognized direct labor relations between workers and contractors in addition to recognizing the labor contract relationship between workers and contractors (employers) through the establishment of implicit labor contracts or recognition of dispatched labor relations. The Supreme Court sees mining rights holders as users of miners when the so - called mining lease agreement is in place. In the event that coal mining operations are carried out under strong supervision and control of mining owners, even though contractors have been reorganized between mining owners and miners in the form of labor supply to avoid liability due to the mine accident or liability under the Labor Standards Act, the miners are believed to have actually signed employment contracts with the mining owners through contractors. The Supreme Court also ruled that the actual working relationship between dispatched workers and the head office was established in the event that the head office had been managing the personnel management of the employees directly from a subsidiary staffing agency, and the company s headquarters to use them in the form of camouflaged supply. Although the requirements for implicit labor relations were mentioned in previous cases before the “Hyundai Mipo Shipbuilding incident,” the ruling was the first time that the actual implicit labor relationship was explicitly recognized according to the requirements. In this case, two important requirements for acknowledging the implicit labor contract relationship are: first, the existence of the original employer is only formal and nominal; second, it is the dependency of the dispatched worker to a third party. In this case, it is determined that there is implicitly a working contract relationship with the contractor immediately after the labor contract between the worker and the supply company. Ulsan Plant Hyundai Motor case is the first Supreme Court case that judged that the contractual relationship between the original company and the subcontractor falls under the dispatch of workers (disguised contract). From here, Although it does not provide a general criterion for the relationship, it has been acknowledged that it is a dispatching relationship based on the judgment of facts centered on the work order. On the day of the judgment of the KTX crew member of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court made also rulings on the illegal dispatch of Hyundai Motor and Namhae Chemical. The decision of the illegal dispatch of Hyundai Motor and the illegal dispatch of Namhae chemical was concluded to be the victory of the workers, but the ruling of the KTX crew member of the Supreme Court was decided as a defeat under the same judgment criteria. In the above three rulings, it is meaningful, the Supreme Court to clarify the abstract rules of judgment as to whether it corresponds to workers dispatch and to present the criteria for future rulings. However, it is unclear to what extent the command authority will be granted in the case of labor subcontract. We expect that more concrete criteria will be established through case law in the future. However, there is doubt as to whether the law was applied based on accurate and comprehensive perception of factual relations.