해고에 대한 대법원 판례법리의 정합성 검토

The Supreme Court requires special additional requirements for employer in dismissal of low-performing employee. The additional requirements are that low performers can be fired only after efforts such as relocation through the implementation of education, etc. based on objective and fair evaluation standards for a considerable period of time. I think, to require for the Court above additional requirements to employer in dismissal of low-performing employee is unreasonable. Hereinafter, I look at the consistency of precedents for dismissal by the Court. In the case of career impersonation, the Court has widely recognized the legitimacy of dismissal generally due to the loss of trust relationship between the employer and an employee. If so, it would be natural for employers to expect an employee to achieve general results in signing labor contracts with the employee, and therefore, it is not reasonable to require above additional requirements for firing the employee on the grounds of low-performing. The Court also recognizes relatively widely the just cause for the refusal of the main employment of apprentice. Furthermore there is no reason to blame an employee for the layoffs. Nevertheless, the Court does relaxed interpretations against requirements of layoff of Article 24 of the Labor Standards Act. In conclusion I think it loses equity between dismissal cases for the Court to require above additional requirements in dismissal of low-performing employee. Therefore the Court will have to improve consistency between judgments in dismissal cases.