earticle

영어

Before one approaches on the policy to the problem distinguishing a contract for work from a temporary agency contract, it shall be a priority that the objective and normative interpretation and criterion with a substance and definition of a temporary agency institution and a contract for work is prepared. In this regard, even though the problem of distinction between both is complicated and at the same time, has a topic with various issues, the current judgment has enforced totally different types of contract after considering some relevant facts as temporary agency elements without any elaborate and systematic demonstration. This is an unpersuadable part in terms of a methodology and legal principle. In this regard, this paper suggested a criterion of reasonable interpretation in order to solve the problem of distinction between a temporary agency contract and a contract for work after it objectively examined a determining criterion resulting from the problem of distinction and attempted the comments in detail with the limit and problem of legal principle of precedents, whether or not the provision of employment considering article is unconstitutional, etc. At least, the use of outside labor (outsourcing) under the contract for work includes an entrepreneurial right and the contract is considered as a type of transaction legitimately and approvably under the economic system of divided labor. Nevertheless, without considering the characteristics of auto industry, it is necessary to agonize seriously that the current judgment has enforced a legal form called as a contract for work in a view of the fact that the supervision-instruction relationship between a contractor and a subcontractor's performance assistant is easily accepted under the pretext of synthetic judgment through listing some parts of fact relevance.