"Cooperative Repair Technicians are Samsung Electronics Service Employees"... Confirmed after 12 Years

[Financial News] A Supreme Court ruling has determined that Samsung Electronics Service must directly employ repair technicians from partner companies. This comes 12 years after the workers filed a lawsuit.
On the 21st, according to the legal community, the Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Presiding Judge Lee Sook-yeon) confirmed the lower court's ruling in favor of some of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed by Mr. A, seeking confirmation of worker status.
Mr. A and other workers from partner companies of Samsung Electronics Service filed a lawsuit in 2013 to confirm their worker status. They argued that although Samsung Electronics Service and the partner companies formally signed a subcontract, an implicit employment contract was actually established.
The first trial ruled against the plaintiffs, but the second trial overturned this, stating, "It can be sufficiently acknowledged that there was a worker dispatch relationship between Mr. A and Samsung Electronics Service."
Additionally, the second trial ordered the payment of the wage difference between the partner company employees and regular employees to Mr. A and others, along with damages for failing to fulfill the obligation of direct employment.
The second trial court judged, "The technicians from partner companies were engaged in work, receiving significant direct and indirect orders and commands from Samsung Electronics Service regarding the core tasks of product repair and maintenance."
Furthermore, it pointed out, "The partner companies operated solely for the product repair tasks of Samsung Electronics Service, and it is difficult to see them as independent business entities with their own organizational structure or facilities."
Initially, over 1,300 repair technicians participated in the lawsuit, but during the second trial in April 2018, many withdrew their suits following a direct employment agreement between labor and management, leaving only Mr. A to continue the case to the Supreme Court.
Samsung Electronics Service cited the confirmation of innocence in a case of alleged violation of the Dispatch Law as a reason for appeal, but it was not accepted.
The Supreme Court explained, "The Supreme Court found it reasonable that it was difficult to acknowledge the intent of the defendants to violate the Dispatch Law," adding, "Recognizing a worker dispatch relationship in this case does not contradict the factual findings of the criminal judgment."
Samsung Electronics Service also cited Mr. A's resignation as a reason for appeal, but the Supreme Court stated, "Even if a dispatched worker resigns or is dismissed after the establishment of a direct employment relationship is deemed, such circumstances do not affect the legal relationship related to the deemed direct employment."

jisseo@fnnews.com Minji Seo