Received an annual salary of 87 million won… Hyundai Motor Company employee who went home for 3 hours every day

A sales worker who sold Hyundai cars was fired after it was revealed that he stayed at home for an average of 2 hours and 40 minutes a day for three months for personal business. Nevertheless, this employee filed a lawsuit for unfair dismissal, saying, “The company came to my house and took illegal debt,” but lost in the second trial.

In particular, Hyundai Motor Company is in the process of unfair dismissal lawsuits against other sales employees for the same reason . ▶Related article “To bring the kids lunch”… Employee who secretly goes home for 3 hours every day [Kwak Yong-hee’s Personnel and Labor Note]

Labor law experts explain that this is a good example of the reality that it is not easy to manage attendance when sales workers who work outside a lot abuse their work characteristics.

○Go home for 2 hours and 40 minutes almost every day during working hoursAccording to the legal community on the 6th, the 38-3 civil division of the Seoul High Court (Judge Min Ji-hyeon) dismissed the appeal in a lawsuit for invalidation of dismissal filed by sales employee A, who was fired from Hyundai Motor Company, against Hyundai Motor Co. (2022 or 2025293).

A joined Hyundai Motor Company in 1997 as a sales employee and worked as a sales employee from March 2002 to around 2020. However, around March 2020, a report came to the company that “A habitually goes out during work hours and stays at home for a long time”, and the company started an audit. As this kind of information continues, the company has also sent several times cooperation to the effect that “private activities are prohibited during working hours, and severe punishment may be imposed if caught.”

In the end, as a result of the company’s investigation, such as collecting evidence through photos and videotaping in the apartment where A stayed for about 3 months from March 5 to May 28, 2020, A It was revealed that they spent an average of 2 hours and 38 minutes a day in their apartment during working hours on 51 of 56 working days . He was also seen going in and out with his children or mother on several occasions.

In the end, the company held a disciplinary committee and fired A. As a result, A filed a lawsuit against the company for unfair dismissal.

During the trial, A claimed, “I parked the car in the parking lot of the apartment and met the residents and did business.” Then, A confronted, saying, “The company did not restrict the area of ​​business activity, but rather paid the cost to attach advertisements to the apartment bulletin board.”

It was also emphasized that the company’s confirmation of his time and attendance with photos and videos was ‘illegal evidence’ . “The company’s follow-up and taking pictures violated the freedom of privacy under the Constitution, and it is a criminal act that constitutes a crime of breach of confidentiality and leakage of business secrets under the Criminal Law, ” and argued that “illegal photos cannot be used as evidence of dismissal.” .

○Court “Received an annual salary of 87 million won and was negligent… Huge damage to the company먹튀검증“However, the court of second trial dismissed A’s claim following the first trial and raised the company’s hand.

First, it was pointed out that the act of borrowing money was not illegal. Previously, the court of the first trial said, ” Even if the company does not control and monitor sales activities that are mainly conducted outside the branch, there is a high level of trust that salespeople will conduct sales activities in good faith. ” We paid wages, but this was paid on the premise of sincere business activities.”

“According to the collective agreement signed between Hyundai Motor’s labor union and the company, the company cannot discipline its salespersons for poor sales,” he said . he pinched. He also pointed out that there is no other realistic way for the company to secure objective evidence other than by taking pictures.

It was also judged that taking pictures was difficult to view as an invasion of privacy.

The court said, ” It is a legitimate concern of the employer whether the worker stays at home without conducting business activities during working hours. ” pointed out

“The parking lot of A’s apartment, where the audit department took the picture, is a public place that anyone can freely enter and exit,” he said.

It was judged that the dismissal was not excessive.

The judge said, “The salesperson stayed at home during working hours and continued to engage in private activities unrelated to work, taking advantage of the laxity of attendance management.” Due to the act of staying, the work order was disrupted, and the morale of fellow salespeople who worked diligently was also lowered.”

“Nevertheless, considering that A only insists that his actions are justified, the relationship of trust between the company and A has been damaged to such an extent that it is difficult to expect the continuation of the labor relationship any longer,” the judge said. . The second trial court also rejected A’s appeal, citing the first trial verdict as it was.

A lawyer specializing in labor law said, “There are not many ways to check the diligence of sales workers, and if something goes wrong, the company could be sued in reverse, as in this case.” “Needs” will inevitably arise, and this kind of litigation will inevitably increase.”

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *