노동3권상 근로자개념

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The problem comes up whether the caddie is worker or not at workplace. In this regard, The Supreme court judged that the caddie is not worker from the standpoint of LABOR STANDARD ACT, but that the caddie is worker from the standpoint of TRADE UNION AND LABOR RELATIONS ADJUSTMENT ACT.
The Supreme do not account for this judgement in greater detail, The Caddie can not understand it. So we need the detail explanation. The Constitution Act is the superior law in the legal system. Therefore it controls the labor law. If the labor law breaches the constitution law, the article of labor law is void.
There are the employees’ rights to enhance working conditions on the 33 article of Constitution Act. That are the right to independent association, collective bargaining, and collective action. By the way, we can not find the explanation to concept of worker on the Constitution Act. So the explanation to the concept of worker should be given.
To get the concept of worker on the Constitution Act we need to acknowledge how the right to independent association was adopted into the Constitution Act. In other words that is to know the historical nature of constitution.
The system of industrial capitalism as the result of Industrial Revolution beginning in England happened a lot of problems. To resolve them Socialism arose. The supporter of capitalism adopt the social rights into constitution law against the socialism. One of them is the right to independent association. That is the concept of worker includes the antagonistic relationship between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. In brief the concept of worker represents the proletariat.
To the conclusion, The Supreme court must judge the worker of TRADE UNION AND LABOR RELATIONS ADJUSTMENT ACT from the standpoint of economic subordination not personal subordination because the concept of worker on the constitution law represents the proletariat.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 栗田 健, "勞動組合" 日本勞動硏究機構 1986

2 片岡昇, "勞動法理論の承繼と發展" 有斐閣 2001

3 片岡昇, "勞動法の基礎理論" 日本評論社 1974

4 정종섭, "헌법학원론 제3판" 박영사 2008

5 장영수, "헌법학, 제6판" 홍문사 2011

6 계희열, "헌법학(중)" 박영사 2000

7 한수웅, "헌법학" 법문사 2013

8 홍성방, "헌법학" 현암사 2008

9 허영, "헌법이론과 헌법(상)" 박영사 1988

10 전광석, "한국헌법론" 법문사 2009

11 허영, "한국헌법론" 박영사 2007

12 박상필, "한국노동법" 대왕사 1988

13 칼라렌트, "정당한 법의 원리" 박영사 1990

14 정인화, "자본주의와 사회주의, 그 이후" 관동대학교 인문과학연구소 13 : 2009

15 정대근, "신자유주의 경제체제의 위기와 경제관계법의 변화" 법학연구소 55 (55): 273-301, 2014

16 이철수, "사회복지학사전" blue fish 2009

17 V.A. Tyulkin, "레닌주의와 수정주의, 사회주의 이론과 실천의 근본문제"

18 강희원, "노동헌법론 초판" 법영사 2011

19 김영환, "노동조합의 기원과 조직형태" 한국경영자총협회 2004

20 이달휴, "노동인격에서의 개인과 집단" 형설출판사 2009

21 박상필, "노동법" 대왕사 1991

22 임종률, "노동법" 박영사 2010

23 편강승, "노동법" 삼지원 1995

24 박종희, "노동3권의 주체에 관한 연구" 한국고용노사관계학회 2001

25 김경제, "근로자의 단체행동권" 한국비교공법학회 4 (4): 2003

26 김형배, "골프장캐디의 노동법상의 지위 - 大判 2014. 2. 13, 2011다78804 및 이 판결의 원심 서울고법 2011. 8. 26, 2009나112116에 대한 비판적 검토 -" 노동법이론실무학회 (13) : 1-36, 2014

27 유성재, "골프장 캐디의 「노조법」상 근로자성- 대법원 2014. 2. 13. 선고 2011다78804 판결 -" 중앙법학회 16 (16): 185-221, 2014

28 이흥재, "고용제한에 관한 연구" 서울대 1988

29 崔弘曄, "集團的勞使關係法上の勞動者槪念" 한국비교노동법학회 21 : 2011

30 片岡昇, "英國勞動法理論史" 有斐閣 1956

31 野田 進, "日本における労働組合法上の労働者概念" 한국비교노동법학회 21 : 145-166, 2011

32 西谷敏, "ドイツ勞動法思想史論" 日本評論社 1987

33 이달휴, "“헌법상” 근로권에 있어서 근로자개념" 한국비교공법학회 12 (12): 3-26, 2011

34 SIDNEY AND BEATRICE WEBB, "THE HISTORY OF TRADE UNIONISM" KELLEY PUBLISHERS 1973