Open Decision Ledger · Labour & industrial accidents
Collective consent and the first year of a switch to annual salaries
Supreme Court, Sept. 26, 2025, 2023Da209106 (judgment)
No holding summary · checked against points at issue. The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Case name: 임금
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Where a university corporation, having run annual salary pay rules for over 17 years, finally obtained a majority resolution of full-time faculty, could the first year's annual salary be fixed by reflecting past performance evaluations, and did the statutory interest run at 15% or 12%?
Holding
Yes to the resolution, no to the first year's method. The Supreme Court upheld that the vote gave majority consent and that the annual salary rules applied to the plaintiff from that date, but held that the consent reached only prospective application, so the first year's salary could not reflect past performance evaluations or accumulated performance; by analogy with the transitional provisions of the pay rules it had to rest on the 2016 proper wage of KRW 71,887,020 raised by one step. On the unpaid KRW 16,052,007, interest ran at 15% a year, because first-instance argument had closed on 28 November 2018 before the amended 12% rate took effect on 1 June 2019. The Court decided that interest point itself under Article 437 of the Civil Procedure Act and dismissed the defendant's appeal on it.
Points at issue, verbatim
위 결의를 통하여 연봉제 임금체계에 대하여 근로자 과반수의 동의가 있었으므로 위 결의 이후로는 갑에게 취업규칙상 변경된 연봉제 규정이 적용되는데, 이때 호봉제에서 연봉제로 임금체계를 전환·적용하는 첫해의 연봉을 기존의 업무실적 평가결과 또는 성과를 반영하는 방식으로 책정할 수 있다고 본 원심판단에는 법리오해 등의 잘못이 있다고 한 사례
Unofficial English translation
since a majority of employees had consented to the annual salary wage system through the above resolution, the amended annual salary system provisions under the rules of employment applied to A from and after the above resolution, but the annual salary for the first year of converting and applying the wage system from the salary step system to the annual salary system could be set in a manner reflecting the results of existing work performance evaluations or performance; it was held that the determination of the judgment of the court below contained a misapprehension of legal principles, etc.
Disposition
Partly reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심판결의 원고 패소 부분 중 16,052,007원에 대한 2023. 1. 12.부터 다 갚는 날까지의 지연손해금 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분에 대한 피고의 항소를 기각한다. 원심판결의 원고 패소 부분 중 2017년 9월분부터 2018년 2월분까지의 임금 및 이에 대한 지연손해금 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분 사건을 광주지방법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The portion of the judgment of the court below concerning the part in which the plaintiff lost, as to the delay damages on 16,052,007 won from January 12, 2023 until the date of full payment, is reversed, and the defendant's appeal as to this portion is dismissed. The portion of the judgment of the court below concerning the part in which the plaintiff lost, as to the wages for the period from September 2017 to February 2018 and the delay damages thereon, is reversed, and this case as to this portion is remanded to the Gwangju District Court.
Form of the test
Existing test applied Read from the decision
그와 같은 사정을 고려하면, 이 사건 결의 당시 교원들은 1999. 3. 1. 자 연봉제 급여지급규정 등을 이 사건 결의 이후부터 장래에 향하여 적용함에 동의하였다고 보일 뿐, 2017년도 연봉을 기존의 업무실적 평가결과를 반영하는 방식으로 책정함에 동의하였다고 인정하기에 부족하다.
Unofficial English translation
In light of such circumstances, it can only be regarded that, at the time of the resolution in this case, the faculty members consented to the application of the annual salary wage payment regulations dated March 1, 1999, etc. from and after this resolution in the future, and this is insufficient to find that they consented to the 2017 annual salary being set in a manner reflecting the results of existing work performance evaluations.
Factors
- 을 법인이 교원의 임금체계에 관하여 기존의 호봉제를 연봉제로 변경하는 내용의 급여지급규정을 제정하여 시행하다가 17년 이상이 지난 후
- 연봉제 급여지급규정 등에 대한 찬반투표를 실시하여 재직 중인 전임교원 과반수의 찬성 결의가 이루어진 사안에서
- 위 결의를 통하여 연봉제 임금체계에 대하여 근로자 과반수의 동의가 있었으므로 위 결의 이후로는 갑에게 취업규칙상 변경된 연봉제 규정이 적용되는데
- 이때 호봉제에서 연봉제로 임금체계를 전환·적용하는 첫해의 연봉을 기존의 업무실적 평가결과 또는 성과를 반영하는 방식으로 책정할 수 있다고 본 원심판단에는 법리오해 등의 잘못이
Unofficial English translation
• after B, the corporation, enacted and implemented wage payment regulations providing that the existing salary step system for the wage system of faculty members would be changed to an annual salary system, and at least 17 years had elapsed
• in a case where a vote for or against the annual salary wage payment regulations, etc. was conducted, whereby a resolution was adopted by a majority of the full-time faculty members in service
• since a majority of employees had consented to the annual salary wage system through the above resolution, the amended annual salary system provisions under the rules of employment applied to A from and after the above resolution, but
• the determination of the judgment of the court below, which found that the annual salary for the first year of converting and applying the wage system from the salary step system to the annual salary system could be set in a manner reflecting the results of existing work performance evaluations or performance, contained a misapprehension of legal principles, etc.
Relation to precedent
States a new standard Read from the decision
원고의 2017년도 연봉을 기존의 누적성과 또는 업무실적 평가결과를 반영하는 방식으로 산정할 수 없다
Unofficial English translation
the plaintiff's 2017 annual salary cannot be calculated in a manner reflecting the existing accumulated performance or the results of work performance evaluations
Decisions referred to
해당 본문 참조
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
If a faculty member performs work during the first year of the annual salary system, may a performance allowance be paid for that year's work, or does the ban on reflecting past performance leave no allowance for the first year at all?
The judgment of the Gwangju District Court on remand for the wages of September 2017 to February 2018 will show how the first-year salary is recalculated. A later decision on the first-year performance allowance, or an amendment to Article 3(1) of the Special Act on Promotion of Litigation or its Enforcement Decree including the transitional rule on the statutory interest rate, would require this entry to be read again.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
6 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-24
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on 6 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 6 (relation to precedent), axis 8 (open question and revisit condition).
Axis 6 (Relation to precedent): Primary “States a new standard” vs Independent “Cannot be determined”
The stated issue presents a specific restriction on first-year salary calculation that may be read as a new standard, while the absence of a holding or an express comparison with precedent leaves the precedent relationship unconfirmed.
원고의 2017년도 연봉을 기존의 누적성과 또는 업무실적 평가결과를 반영하는 방식으로 산정할 수 없다Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “If a faculty member performs work during the first year of the annual salary system, may a performance allowance be paid for that year's work, or does the ban on reflecting past performance leave no allowance for the first year at all?” vs Independent “Would explicit collective consent to using pre-transition performance results permit those results to determine the first annual salary?”
The primary reading asks about allowances for work performed during the first year, while the independent reading asks whether explicit collective consent would permit use of performance from before the transition.
위 결의를 통하여 연봉제 임금체계에 대하여 근로자 과반수의 동의가 있었으므로 위 결의 이후로는 갑에게 취업규칙상 변경된 연봉제 규정이 적용되는데, 이때 호봉제에서 연봉제로 임금체계를 전환·적용하는 첫해의 연봉을 기존의 업무실적 평가결과 또는 성과를 반영하는 방식으로 책정할 수 있다고 본 원심판단에는 법리오해 등의 잘못이 있다고 한 사례Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The court below held that the vote of 16 August 2017, in which 100 of the 107 voting full-time faculty out of 145 were in favour, gave majority consent to the annual salary rules, which applied to the plaintiff after that date. Assuming that the first year's 2017 salary could reflect existing performance evaluations, it found the plaintiff's evidence too thin to show that the salary set rested on improper accumulated performance or that the evaluation was wrong, and dismissed that claim. On KRW 16,052,007 it applied interest at 12% a year from 12 January 2023.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court found no error in the finding that the resolution gave majority consent and that the annual salary rules applied to the plaintiff from then on. It held, however, that the materials the defendant handed out at the vote recorded prospective effect and gave no concrete explanation of how the 2017 salary would be set, so the consent reached only prospective application. Since a first year has no prior-year base salary and performance predating the system could cause unforeseen disadvantage, the transitional provisions were to be applied by analogy. On interest it reversed that portion, decided the point itself under Article 437 of the Civil Procedure Act, and, holding the first-instance judgment right on it, dismissed the defendant's appeal on that part; the wage portion was reversed and remanded to the Gwangju District Court.
Distinguishing conditions
- A later year of the annual salary system, where a prior-year base salary exists and the first-year problem does not arise.
- A case where the vote materials or a separate wage agreement concretely set out how the first year's salary is fixed and the faculty consent to reflecting past performance results.
- A case whose first-instance argument closed on or after 1 June 2019, where the amended rate of 12% applies.
Record verification notes
Set the resolution date against the materials the corporation distributed to faculty and look for wording on retroactive effect or on the first-year salary, since the Court read the vote as prospective only. Confirm whether a separate agreement on wages exists, and fix the date first-instance argument closed to choose between 15% and 12%. Set the KRW 71,887,020 base against the earlier final judgments that fixed the proper wage under the step system, since the Court used that figure as the starting point.
From the official text
Points at issue
갑이 을 학교법인이 설치·운영하는 대학교의 교수로 임용되어 호봉제가 적용된 임금을 받고 있었는데, 을 법인이 교원의 임금체계에 관하여 기존의 호봉제를 연봉제로 변경하는 내용의 급여지급규정을 제정하여 시행하다가 17년 이상이 지난 후 연봉제 급여지급규정 등에 대한 찬반투표를 실시하여 재직 중인 전임교원 과반수의 찬성 결의가 이루어진 사안에서, 위 결의를 통하여 연봉제 임금체계에 대하여 근로자 과반수의 동의가 있었으므로 위 결의 이후로는 갑에게 취업규칙상 변경된 연봉제 규정이 적용되는데, 이때 호봉제에서 연봉제로 임금체계를 전환·적용하는 첫해의 연봉을 기존의 업무실적 평가결과 또는 성과를 반영하는 방식으로 책정할 수 있다고 본 원심판단에는 법리오해 등의 잘못이 있다고 한 사례
Unofficial English translation
A case where A was appointed as a professor at a university established and operated by B, a school corporation, and was receiving wages to which the salary step system was applied, and B, the corporation, enacted and implemented wage payment regulations providing that the existing salary step system for the wage system of faculty members would be changed to an annual salary system, and then, after at least 17 years had elapsed, conducted a vote for or against the annual salary wage payment regulations, etc., whereby a resolution was adopted by a majority of the full-time faculty members in service; in which case the judgment of the court below found that, since a majority of employees had consented to the annual salary wage system through the above resolution, the amended annual salary system provisions under the rules of employment applied to A from and after the above resolution, but that the annual salary for the first year of converting and applying the wage system from the salary step system to the annual salary system could be set in a manner reflecting the results of existing work performance evaluations or performance; and where it was held that the determination of the judgment of the court below contained a misapprehension of legal principles, etc.
Summary of the holding
The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Order
원심판결의 원고 패소 부분 중 16,052,007원에 대한 2023. 1. 12.부터 다 갚는 날까지의 지연손해금 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분에 대한 피고의 항소를 기각한다. 원심판결의 원고 패소 부분 중 2017년 9월분부터 2018년 2월분까지의 임금 및 이에 대한 지연손해금 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분 사건을 광주지방법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The portion of the judgment of the court below concerning the part in which the plaintiff lost, as to the delay damages on 16,052,007 won from January 12, 2023 until the date of full payment, is reversed, and the defendant's appeal as to this portion is dismissed. The portion of the judgment of the court below concerning the part in which the plaintiff lost, as to the wages for the period from September 2017 to February 2018 and the delay damages thereon, is reversed, and this case as to this portion is remanded to the Gwangju District Court.
Provisions referred to
근로기준법 제4조, 제94조, 제97조
Read 2026-10-24 · Cross-read 2026-10-24. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger