강행법규를 위반한 통상임금 합의와 신의성실원칙의 적용

December 18, 2013, the Supreme Court ruled the problem for the concept and scope of the normal wage which has been controversial for ordinary wage. It is thought to be effective to reduce the clutter of the on-site labor. But, the Supreme Court mentioned “The labor-management agreement for the range of normal wage is no effect to both parties to legal actions because of violations of mandatory rules. But the workers claims for additional wage may be not allowed in accordance with the principle of good faith.”On the one hand, I was surprised about that limits the legal rights of workers by applying the principle of good faith in a legal action for violation of mandatory rules. On the other hand, That surprised me even more is to apply the principle of good faith called the general provisions to limits of the rights of workers in the labor law area that modified civil law principles. Meanwhile, in the labor area, the judgment applied the principle of good faith exist but, I thought it would always be ‘exceptional’. But, I can only think that it can be applied at any time and any situation if there exists situational specificity. Personally, I think it logical and reasonable that the court allowed to claims of additional benefits for workers because he labor-management agreement for the range of normal wage is no effect to both parties to legal actions. I think that the court need to wait for legislative action in Congress before making a decision.