2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

A. On September 1, 2015, the Plaintiff is a corporation established by the joint investment and contribution of 16 universities and E in the area D and E, and is engaged in management consulting services, such as commercialization of technology and the demand of enterprises in the area D by ordinarily employing 15 workers.

On May 30, 2016, the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) concluded a labor contract with the Plaintiff, which set the period of time, and carried out financial affairs, accounting, etc. under the business management team.

B. On April 16, 2018, the Plaintiff requested the intervenors to prepare and submit a “business performance and technical document” to deliberate on the conversion into regular positions, and notified the Intervenor that “it may be converted to regular employees after the expiration of the contract period according to the personnel committee’s evaluation.”

C. On May 4, 2018, the Plaintiff held a personnel committee and conducted an examination of conversion of five fixed-term workers, including intervenors, into regular employees.

(hereinafter “this case’s personnel committee”). The instant personnel committee gave to intervenors points below 80 points, which are internal control points for conversion of regular workers, and on May 29, 2018, the Plaintiff notified the intervenors that labor relations are terminated due to the expiration of the contract period.

(hereinafter “instant notice”). D.

The Intervenor asserted that the instant notification constitutes unfair dismissal, and on August 21, 2018, filed an application for remedy with the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission.

On October 19, 2018, the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission decided that the refusal by the plaintiff to convert the intervenor to regular positions was unfair and accepted the application for remedy by the intervenor.

E. The Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the above initial inquiry tribunal, filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission.

On February 14, 2019, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered a decision to dismiss the plaintiff's application for reexamination on the same ground as the initial inquiry tribunal of the Regional Labor Relations Commission.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant retrial ruling”). (No dispute exists with recognition ground, and evidence A Nos. 1 and 2.