재직조건 또는 일정근무일수 조건이 있는 상여금의 통상임금성

Abstract

On Dec 18, 2013, the Korean Supreme Court has set out detailed standards on the previously contested ordinary wage, especially mentioned ‘fixedness’ element of ordinary wage. However after the Supreme Court En banc decision, still there exist arguments about ordinary wage. In particular, lower courts’ decisions whether bonuses paid only to those employees working for the employer on a specific date, and bonuses paid contingent on whether an employee meets a certain number of working days condition included in ordinary wages are different each other, and it causes confusion. The confusion is about ‘fixedness’. Lower courts’ different decisions on the issue whether bonuses with a condition working on a specific date or a requirement working for specific days are due to understanding the meaning of ‘fixedness’. And some of lower courts’ decisions misunderstood the ruling of 2013 Supreme Court decision. To avoid contradictions, courts should understand the Supreme Court decision(majority opinion), and make a distinction between the issue of ‘interpretation of requirements’, ‘legal validity of requirements’ from the issue of judging ordinary wage.