2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

A. The Plaintiff is a company that employs approximately eight full-time workers and operates management consulting business, etc.

The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is a person who was employed and worked for each Plaintiff on February 23, 2017, and March 13, 2017 by the Intervenor C.

B. On May 18, 2018, the Intervenor asserted to the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission that “the Plaintiff was unfairly dismissed on March 31, 2018,” the Intervenor made an application for remedy against unfair dismissal.

On July 17, 2018, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission received the Intervenor’s request for remedy on the ground that “the Plaintiff dismissed the Intervenor on March 31, 2018, and during this process, it was unlawful by failing to comply with the procedure under Article 27 of the Labor Standards Act.”

C. On November 21, 2018, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered an adjudication dismissing the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination (hereinafter “instant reexamination decision”) with the ground that “the dismissal of the Plaintiff’s Intervenor is without good cause” was the same as that of the said initial inquiry tribunal.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is lawful

A. On March 30, 2018, the Intervenor, at the Plaintiff’s office, was under consultation on the reorganization of the payment system with the Plaintiff, retired unilaterally by failing to work after leaving the Plaintiff’s office.

The e-mail sent by the Plaintiff to the intervenors around the above time is intended to take advantage of the advantages of negotiations, not to send the intervenors with their intention of dismissal.

If the Plaintiff intended to dismiss the Intervenor, it would have employed workers to replace the Intervenor before the Intervenor retires, and requested the Intervenor to furnish the relevant documents such as resignation from the Intervenor and to take over the work.

The Plaintiff.