“I am proud of this judgment”… Supreme Court “No excessive suppression of illegal protests”
The country files a compensation suit against the damage during the 2009 strike … It seems that the responsibility for trade unions has been reduced
On the 30th, union members were delighted when a ruling came out that the act of resisting an excessive police crackdown during a long-term strike against layoffs by Ssangyong Motor workers could be seen as self-defense.
Kim Deuk-joong, head of the Ssangyong Motors branch of the Korea Metal Workers’ Union, who led the ‘Ssangyong Motor Incident’ in the past, said in a phone call with Yonhap News that day, “It’s fortunate that there is now a prominent incident. Judgment which raises awareness of the police’s unfair suspension of workers who took part in the strike.” “There was a problem as the judgments of the first and second trial, which the union believed had to pay compensation of 1 billion to the state, reflected only the one-sided claim of the police,” he argued.
He said, “Following the ‘Ssangyong Motor Incident’, many union members suffered a lot for a long time and had a hard time,” he said.
“However, as we have to fight for compensation responsibility again in the high court, we cannot be happy yet,” he said. I’ll start moving,” he said.
The first division of the Supreme Court (presiding judge, Chief Justice Noh Tae-ak) overturned the lower court’s ruling in favor of some of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed by the state against executives of the Ssangyong Motor Branch of the Metal Workers Union Korea and the Confederation of Korean Trade Unions, and sent the case back to the Seoul High Court.
The Supreme Court ruled that the police should not arrest the workers responsible for destroying the helicopter, saying it could be illegal for the police to spray tear gas or shoot wind down directly at the workers on the roof.
Even if assemblies and demonstrations are illegal, the act of resisting illegal and excessive police suppression is self-defense.
The Supreme Court said, “If a police officer causes harm to the life or body of other people by using certain police equipment in a way that is different from the normal use specified by the relevant laws and regulations in the performance of his duties, the performance. his duties are illegal unless there are special circumstances.” Even if the police equipment is damaged in the process of direct resistance to avoid harm to life or body caused by him, this is an act to escape from the existing unfair crime and caused by the unlawful performance of public duties, and constitutes self-defence.” that was judged
Earlier, from May to August 2009, SsangYong Motor workers went on strike for 77 days at the Pyeongtaek factory in protest of severe financial difficulties and the announcement of layoffs.
As the management tried to enter the factory, the two sides clashed physically, and eventually the police launched a containment operation using helicopters and cranes.
When police officers were injured and equipment damaged due to protests by protesters, the state filed a lawsuit for damages.
The 1st and 2nd trials raised the state’s hand, saying that union officials were responsible for compensatory damages because they committed and initiated acts of violence.
The first trial set the compensation amount at 1.3 billion won and the second trial at 1.1 billion won.
However, as the Supreme Court exempts workers from some of their responsibilities, the final amount of compensation is expected to be less than 1.1 billion won.