The costs of appeal are assessed against the Intervenor, and the remainder are assessed against the Intervenor.

1. As to the ground of appeal against the plaintiff A and C

A. In order to deem the activity of a trade union as legitimate grounds for disciplinary action exist, it shall be deemed that the activity of a trade union can be seen as an activity of a trade union, or that the implied authorization or approval of a trade union has been obtained, and it shall be an act necessary to maintain and improve the working conditions and promote the enhancement of workers’ economic status, and shall be conducted during employment hours, except as otherwise provided in the rules of employment or collective agreement, practices, and consent of the employer, and shall follow reasonable rules or restrictions based on the right to manage the facilities of the trade union in the workplace and shall not follow acts of violence, destruction, etc.

(See Supreme Court Decision 91Do3044 delivered on April 10, 1992, etc.). The lower court determined that each of the instant disciplinary measures against Plaintiff A and C cannot be acknowledged on grounds of its stated reasoning, on the ground that it is difficult to readily conclude that safety risks have occurred due to the instant on-site circuit, etc.

In light of the aforementioned legal principles and records, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on trade union activities, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, found the Intervenor’s instant disciplinary action against the Plaintiff A and C in relation to the legitimate trade union activity.