2. The Plaintiff’s portion of revocation is against the Defendants.

A. The Plaintiff is a social welfare foundation established and operated with the aim of establishing and operating childcare facilities for infants and young children, and is operating “G Infant Care Center” located in the female city.

Defendant CFS, a foundation, (hereinafter “Defendant CFS”), is a media company that operates online newspaper labor news, and Defendant B is a reporter belonging to Defendant CFS.

Defendant C and D are those who have worked as life guides at G Infant Care Center.

B. On August 12, 2011, the Plaintiff dismissed the Defendant C, etc., who worked as a life instructor at G Infant Care Center on the ground of absence from office for ten days (hereinafter “instant dismissal”) (hereinafter “instant dismissal”).

(2) On August 10, 201, Defendant C and D filed an application for unfair dismissal with the former Southern Regional Labor Relations Commission. The former Southern Regional Labor Relations Commission received the application for remedy from Defendant C and D, and the Plaintiff filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission. However, the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination on the ground that the dismissal of Defendant C and D constitutes unfair dismissal.

3) The Plaintiff, who is dissatisfied with the above review decision, filed a lawsuit against the chairman of the Seoul Administrative Court against the chairman of the Central Labor Agency for cancellation of the said review decision, and the said court rendered a judgment revoking the above review decision by the National Labor Relations Commission on September 25, 2012. Accordingly, the chairman of the National Labor Relations Commission appealedd as Seoul High Court 2012Nu32446, but the appellate court rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on June 14, 2013, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on July 5, 2013. (c) The co-defendant E of the first instance trial, as the head of the Democratic Labor Relations General, received civil complaints related to dismissal from the Defendant C and D, who was a member of the Democratic Labor Relations Office, and requested the director of the G Infantcare Center and the secretariat to immediately assign the Defendant C and the working-level child care services.

2 The co-defendant E of the first instance court shall be related to the G Infant Care Center thereafter.