부당해고구제재심판정취소
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as stated in Paragraph 1 of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except where the defendant’s intervenor’s intervenor(s) and the second and third parties’ intervenor(s) in the second and the second and third parties’ intervenor(s) in the judgment of the first instance are used as “B”. Thus, this part is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is lawful
A. The grounds for the court’s explanation on this part of the parties’ assertion are as follows: (a) the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance other than the submission of the 5th or lower of the judgment of the court of first instance to “B” and “B.”
A. The previous arguments in B, where a supplementary intervenor had the same as those in paragraphs (1) and (2), are the same, the validity of the previous arguments in B, even if they had withdrawn the application for intervention, shall be maintained, and even if the Defendant did not invoke it. However, the Defendant’s assertion contrary to B’s previous arguments by stating that “The grounds for the first and second disciplinary action shall be acknowledged, and the part of “the procedural defect of the instant dismissal” shall not be disputed at the fifth date for pleading, thereby lose its validity pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 76(2) of the Civil Procedure Act, and thus, shall not be the litigation materials.
Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be quoted as it is.
B. We examine the existence of the grounds for disciplinary action 3 and 4 as the defendant does not dispute the existence of the grounds for disciplinary action Nos. 1 and 2 acknowledged in the reexamination decision of this case among the grounds for dismissal of this case.
1) The following facts and circumstances are revealed in full view of Gap evidence Nos. 5 through 10, 19 through 21, and the purport of N’s testimony and oral argument as to the grounds for disciplinary action No. 3.
① Since 2014, D, an employee of the Plaintiff, needs governance from B along with various bathings.