Costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff, including the part resulting from the participation.

A. The Plaintiff is a local public corporation in Busan Metropolitan City, which was established on January 25, 1991, and a corporation that engages in an urban development project by ordinarily employing approximately approximately 290 female workers.

B. On June 22, 2015, the Intervenor joining the Defendant’s Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) as a professional contract position (B) and served as an external cooperation officer.

(c)

On May 9, 2019, the Plaintiff issued a notice of termination of the labor contract (hereinafter “the termination of the instant labor relationship”) to the Intervenor on the following grounds: (a) the Plaintiff terminated the labor contract as of June 22, 2019; and (b) the grounds for termination are “the expiration of the contract period” (hereinafter “the termination of the instant labor relationship”).

(d)

On June 26, 2019, an intervenor filed a request for remedy from unfair dismissal on the ground that the termination of the labor relationship of this case constitutes unfair dismissal with the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission.

The Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission rendered a decision to the effect that the termination of the instant labor relationship constitutes unfair dismissal on the ground that the participant cannot be deemed a person falling under an exception to the restriction on the period of employment for fixed-term workers under the Act on the Protection, etc. of Fixed-Term and Part-Time Workers (hereinafter “Period Act”). As such, on June 22, 2017, when two years have passed since the contract period was changed to a non-fixed-term worker, and the termination of the instant labor relationship based on the expiration of the contract period was not recognized as justifiable grounds for dismissal, the termination of the instant labor relationship on the ground that it constitutes unfair dismissal (D). The Plaintiff was dissatisfied with the first instance judgment and filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission on September 25, 2019, but the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination on the same ground as the first instance judgment on November 25, 2019. The purport of each of the instant judgment and each of the grounds for appeal No. 1372, Mar. 8, 2019

2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is legitimate

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion intervenor is “2620 government and 2620 government” among “the two occupations (public administration experts) of the Korea Standard Occupational Classification.”