2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part arising from the supplementary participation.

[Supplementary judgment] The Plaintiff asserts that “Although there was a right to expect the conclusion of a commission contract after his retirement age, the Plaintiff treated the instant retirement without complying with the procedure of review of re-employment solely on the ground that the Plaintiff joined the Korea Public Transport Service Workers’ Union, so the instant judgment on unfair dismissal and unfair labor practices was unlawful. In full view of various circumstances recognized by the evidence adopted by the first instance court as seen earlier, the pertinent provisions under the rules of employment or collective agreement do not necessarily correspond to the rules of authority or discretion that the Intervenor may re-employment within a certain scope when deemed necessary even in the case of an employee who has retired ipso facto after her retirement age. Therefore, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff has the right to demand the conclusion of a commission contract on the part of the Intervenor. In addition, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff’s reasonable expectation right has been formed between the Intervenor and the Intervenor solely on the grounds and materials submitted by the Plaintiff, and there is no justification for the Intervenor’s rejection of the Plaintiff’s decision that did not re-employment with respect to the Plaintiff.”

2. In conclusion, the part seeking the revocation of the adjudication on the suspension from office in the instant lawsuit is unlawful, and thus, it shall be dismissed, and the remainder of the Plaintiff’s claim shall be dismissed as there is no justifiable reason.