A. The defendant is an unincorporated association composed of representatives elected by the occupants for the management of Busan Jin-gu B Apartment (hereinafter "the apartment of this case"). The plaintiff entered into a labor contract with the defendant around September 21, 2014 to work as the head of the management office of the apartment of this case from September 22, 2014 to September 21, 2016 (hereinafter "the contract of this case"), and is an employee who worked as the head of the management office of the apartment of this case.

B. The Defendant’s notice of dismissal 1) decided to convert the management form of the instant apartment into a consignment management, and the Plaintiff published a housing management operator selection announcement on June 30, 2015, and partially revised and published a detailed evaluation table of the qualification examination system for housing management operator selection in the standard form of the Management Rules for Multi-Family Housing in Busan Metropolitan City. 2) The Defendant’s Chairperson C raised an objection to the said act by the Plaintiff, changed the detailed evaluation table into the standard form, and issued the second housing management operator selection announcement after changing the said detailed evaluation table into the standard form. However, on July 18, 2015, the number of tendering companies falls short of the minimum standards and the third housing management operator selection announcement was made.

3) On July 27, 2015, a third bidding date, submitted documents for tender support, but requested the return of documents for tender support after about 30 minutes. The head of the apartment management office of this case returned the above documents at the Plaintiff’s order, and thereby, the number of bidding enterprises became below the minimum standards. 4) The Defendant held the council of occupants’ representatives on August 5, 2015. The Defendant decided that “legal response, such as civil, criminal, accusation, and submission to the Disciplinary Committee, against a bidder,” with the consent of six members, while six of the total eight members are present.

5) On August 28, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff and the head of the instant apartment trade union branch office of the Personnel Committee (hereinafter “Personnel Committee”) to be present at the meeting, and around September 4, 2015.