직장 내 괴롭힘 사업장 내 조치 의무 위반의 판단과 실무상 쟁점 = Interpretation of Employer’s Duty Regarding Workplace Harassment and Practical Issues

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Under Article 76-3 of the Labor Standards Act, employers are obligated to take action when workplace bullying occurs. The duties assigned to the employer and investigators are outlined in each stage of the process, from the beginning of the event until the final results of the investigation. If these duties are violated, fines and other penalties may be imposed. However, the legal provisions are quite simplistic considering their direct impact on the affected employee, leading to difficulties in interpretation and application.
This paper examines the content of the duties of action under Article 76-3, paragraphs 2 through 7 of the Labor Standards Act, and reviews lower court rulings that involved legal disputes surrounding these duties. The paper also explores the standards for interpreting violations of these duties, summarizing the portions of the law that can be interpreted and the standards for violations derived from current case law. Additionally, it proposes a refined interpretation of paragraph 3, regarding "protective measures during the investigation," and paragraph 6, concerning the "prohibition of unfavorable treatment of the victimized employee." The duty in paragraph 3 aims to prevent further bullying and ensure the procedural rights of employees during the investigation and handling of workplace bullying. This duty should be implemented in accordance with such scope and purpose. In paragraph 6, the Supreme Court's interpretation in sexual harassment cases can be applied to the prohibition of unfavorable treatment, and it is necessary to interpret the phrase "victimized employees, etc." broadly, and consider the subjective intention of the victimized employee in order to reflect the characteristics of workplace bullying regulations.
Through the development of discussions on the duty of action in the workplace, practical confusion can be reduced, and procedural progress based on trust can be established.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 오세웅 ; 김동욱, "직장 내 괴롭힘에 대한 사용자의 조사 의무와 입증책임" 34 (34): 2023
• 2 이수연, "직장 내 괴롭힘에 대한 법적 쟁점 분석을 통한 대응방안 모색" 29 (29): 2019
• 3 양승엽, "직장 내 괴롭힘 피해자에 대한 사용자의 불리한 처우 해석-청주지방법원 충주지원 2021. 4. 6. 선고 2020고단245 판결" (79) : 2021
• 4 김인희, "직장 내 괴롭힘 판단기준에 대한 연구-입법 이후 판례 분석을 중심으로" (56) : 2024
• 5 이재현, "직장 내 괴롭힘 자율적 대응체계와 적용범위의 확장" (49) : 2023
• 6 김정민, "직장 내 괴롭힘 사건의 ‘비밀누설 금지의무’ 관련 실무상 쟁점" 2024
• 7 최홍기, "직장 내 괴롭힘 금지제도의 실태와 발전 과제시행 3주년 실태조사 결과를 소재로 하여-" (49) : 2023
• 8 정희경, "직장 내 괴롭힘 금지의 실무상 제 문제-개정"근로기준법"의 내용을 중심으로" (97) : 2020
• 9 장우찬, "직장 내 괴롭힘 금지 제도와 실효적 구제-구제의 완전성과 다양성을 중심으로-" 23 (23): 2022
• 10 윤혜정, "직장 내 괴롭힘 구제제도" (89) : 2024
• 11 윤우일, "불리한 처우금지와 사용자의 책임 확대" 29 (29): 2021
• 12 이준희, "고용노동부"직장 내 괴롭힘 대응ㆍ예방 매뉴얼"의 문제점과 개선방안" 58 : 2019