2. The costs of the lawsuit, including costs incurred by participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

A. The Defendant Intervenor B Corporation (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is a government-affiliated institution based on the B Corporation Act, which employs 6,695 full-time workers and carries out national land development projects.

On August 23, 1982, the Plaintiff became a member of the Intervenor and worked in the building business division from February 17, 201 to February 16, 2012, and in the urban regeneration business division from February 17, 2012 to October 2012, and was in charge of the follow-up management of the residential environment improvement district and the response of civil petitions in the completion district on the treatment of the head of the administrative Grade III, and was in charge of assisting in the purchase of multi-household housing at the time of the work of the construction business division.

B. On March 7, 2013, the Intervenor: (a) held a general personnel committee on March 7, 2013; (b) decided to dismiss the Plaintiff in accordance with attached Table 76(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Personnel Regulations on the ground that the Plaintiff’s misconduct constitutes Article 48(1) of the Personnel Regulations on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s restriction on holding concurrent office of employment rules, the Plaintiff’s act constitutes a violation of the duty to refrain from and refrain from the interest in the code of conduct for executives and employees; and (c) the obligation to refrain

(hereinafter “instant removal disposition”). The Plaintiff requested an intervenor to file a request for a retrial, but was resolved on May 13, 2013 to the effect that the Plaintiff dismissed the application.

C. On June 7, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for remedy against unfair dismissal with the Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission, and on August 8, 2013, the Plaintiff was judged to have been cited on the ground that the instant dismissal disposition was an excessive disciplinary action that has lost balance compared to the degree of flight.

d. (2013rd Sea 217)

On September 5, 2013, an intervenor filed an application for review with the National Labor Relations Commission for cancellation of the initial trial tribunal. On November 13, 2013, the National Labor Relations Commission revoked the said initial trial tribunal on the ground that the removal of the instant case was justifiable, and rendered a decision on March 11, 2013 by the intervenor to recognize that the dismissal of the Plaintiff on March 11, 2013 was legitimate.

(Central 2013 Part 781, hereinafter referred to as the "instant decision on review").