According to the timely evidence of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court below, the decision of the court below that recognized each of the crimes of this case is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law such as the theory of lawsuit.

In short, the theory of the lawsuit is in short, Article 12 (2) of the Labor Dispute Mediation Act provides that "an employee engaged in a defense industry enterprise designated under the Act on Special Measures for the Defense Industry shall not conduct industrial actions," which provides that the part that "shall not conduct industrial actions," shall be in violation of Article 33 (1) of the Constitution and Article 11 (1) of the Constitution which declares the principle of equality, which provides that the right to collective action of workers shall be guaranteed by the Act, but the above provision of the law provides that "the right to collective action of workers engaged in a major defense enterprise as provided by the Act may be restricted or not recognized by the Act, as provided by the Act," and Article 33 (3) of the Constitution provides that "the right to collective action of workers engaged in a major defense industry enterprise may be restricted or not recognized by the Act, as provided by the Act, and

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and part of the number of detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence under Article 24 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent

Justices Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice)