자동차 제조 간접공정에서 파견과 도급의 구별 ―대상판결: 서울고등법원 2022. 1. 28. 선고 2020나 2008508, 2020나2008515(병합) 판결―

Abstract

The Seoul High Court’s ruling, 2020na2008508, 2020na2008515, which was decided on January 28, 2022 demonstrates a clear understanding of the relationship between five elements; they were presented in 2010da 106436 decided by the Supreme Court of Korea on February 26, 2015 as legal principles.BR The Seoul High Court conducted a thorough examination of each task and plaintiff, according to the legal principles, which were suggested by the Supreme Court of Korea.BR The Seoul High Court’s ruling recognized that transportation industry developed on its own in the modern society, and understood the reality of sharing information on manufacturing, which was for the sake of improving efficiency of handling completed vehicles of the manufacturing industry. Moreover, the Seoul High Court analyzed the tasks involving sequence and placement of components of cars, preservation, and export shipping, during an indirect process of manufacturing cars, based on five elements.BR Subcontract should not be misused as means to elude the enforcement of the Act on The Protection of Temporary Agency Workers. However, it is significant to scrutinize the application of the Act on The Protection of Temporary Agency Workers so that an indiscreet, extensive practice of it should not become the impediments to the reorganization of industrial structure, which are devised to improve the efficiency of a production process in a manufacturing industry, to technological innovation, and to an effective sharing of information on manufacturing.BR Applying the legal principles, which were decided by the Supreme Court of Korea in 2015, the Seoul High Court’s ruling managed to reach a reasonable compromise between protecting workers through the Act on The Protection of Temporary Agency Workers and organizing industrial structure effectively, including that of a transportation industry.