2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. 1) The Defendant is a corporation that is established on April 19, 2005 and ordinarily employs 20 full-time workers and operates the radio and local media center’s operation business. 2) The Plaintiff is a person who was employed in the C Promotion Agency on May 1, 2012 and worked as the secretary-general of the D Center (hereinafter “instant Center”).

B. From June 1, 2015, when the commission contractor was changed to the C Promotion Agency, the Defendant was entrusted to operate the instant center, and the Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant from June 1, 2015 to serve as the secretary general of the instant center.

C. However, on November 28, 2015, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a document stating that “work contract will expire as of December 31, 2015,” and notified the termination of the labor relationship, and took measures to terminate the labor relationship with the Plaintiff on December 31, 2015.

1) On March 29, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that the dismissal was unfair, and filed an application for remedy E with the Gangwon Regional Labor Relations Commission. On May 24, 2016, the Gangwon Regional Labor Relations Commission recognized that the above dismissal was unfair, and ordered the Defendant to pay the amount equivalent to wages that could have been paid if the Plaintiff had worked normally during the period of dismissal. 2) The Defendant dissatisfied with the above early trial court, filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission on June 30, 2016, but the National Labor Relations Commission rejected the Defendant’s application for reexamination on the same ground as the early trial court on September 23, 2016.

3) On October 19, 2017, the Defendant filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the said judgment (Seoul Administrative Court G), and the said court rendered a judgment dismissing the Defendant’s claim on the ground that the said disposition is unfair. On the grounds of the appeal, the Defendant’s appeal (Seoul High Court H) and appeal (Seoul High Court I but both appeals and appeals were dismissed, and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

E. Meanwhile, on the other hand.