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

A. The Plaintiff is a company that employs about 15 full-time workers and engages in newspaper publishing business.

The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) was employed by the Plaintiff on September 17, 2009 and served as a reporter.

C. A trade union (hereinafter referred to as the “instant trade union”) is an industrial trade union organized by workers in press industries under the affiliated organization of D, and its affiliated organization has a “A branch of the C Trade Union” (hereinafter referred to as the “instant branch”).

The intervenor is working as the representative of the division of this case.

B. On October 18, 2017, the Plaintiff notified the intervenors that they were excluded from their duties to refer the Intervenor to the Personnel Committee on the grounds as indicated below [Attachment 1]:

(hereinafter “instant standby order”) . [Attachment 1] . [Attachment 1] . The chief of the department, who did not comply with the direction of the chief of the department belonging to 1, resigned, etc., resulting in serious problems by closing the business of the company.

(hereinafter referred to as "base 1 disciplinary action") . 2 East E reporters' honor was inappropriate to F.

(hereinafter “Cause 2”) . 3 Industry Department made it known to F that the past would be widen, which constitutes serious defamation against the party concerned.

(hereinafter “Grounds for Disciplinary Action 3”) 4 The company committed a serious act that seriously undermines the in-house atmosphere, as if there are serious conspiracys and problems with the company’s work F, with its own intent to enter into its business F with the content of “gradation of temporary dismissal.”

(hereinafter “Grounds for Disciplinary Action 4”) 5, October 2017, 2017, including several advertising articles that cannot be submitted for a period of 2 weeks (10-13 days).

(hereinafter referred to as "grounds for disciplinary action") c.

On November 6, 2017, the personnel committee of the Plaintiff recognized the grounds for disciplinary action such as the instant standby order against the Intervenor, which is insufficient to understand the organization under Article 71 subparag. 1 (a person who violated the company’s regulations and orders), subparag. 2 (a person who violated the company’s regulations and orders), and subparag. 16 of the Rules of Employment.