The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles and improper sentencing)

A. In light of the following circumstances, Article 49 of the instant collective agreement is valid. Therefore, the disciplinary action against workers in violation of the above provision constitutes a violation of the important procedures for disciplinary action among the contents of the collective agreement, but the court below acquitted the labor union and the violation of the Labor Relations Adjustment Act, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(1) An organization agreement is formed when a trade union enters into an agreement with an employer or employers’ association on working conditions and other matters arising from labor-management relations and signed and sealed by both parties. The agreement of this case entered into through the above procedure is effective.

② Since the proviso of Article 10 of the D Medical Personnel Management Regulations has already been set up before the conclusion of the instant collective agreement, Article 49 of the instant collective agreement does not bring about a change in the existing personnel regulations, nor does it entails a change in the budget expenditure, etc. to workers, it cannot be said that it has no effect on the sole ground that it did not go through a resolution of the board of directors.

③ The Defendant, for a long time, did not raise any question about the validity of Article 49 of the instant collective agreement, and, on July 2012, when the president was in office, constituted a disciplinary committee and took disciplinary action against employees. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion to be null and void on the ground that there was no resolution by the board of directors on this issue and on the ground that it was in violation of the principle

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (the suspended sentence of KRW 500,000,000) is too unhutiled and unfair.

2. The prosecutor at the lower court also asserted the same as the lower court, and the lower court made a decision on the composition method and disciplinary action of the Disciplinary Committee.