1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff is Hyundai Automobile Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Modern Motor”).

(2) The Defendants, as the Plaintiff’s employee, are labor union members belonging to the Korea Metal Workers’ Association affiliated with the Korea Metal Workers’ Association. The Supreme Court rendered a judgment to the effect that, on July 22, 2010, Hyundai Motor Qu Factory Workers R is deemed to be employed as an employee belonging to Hyundai Motor (Supreme Court Decision 2008Du4367 Decided July 22, 2010). The Plaintiff refused existing practices that had been engaged in collective bargaining with the Plaintiff and requested for direct collective bargaining with Hyundai Motors, thereby causing damage to the Plaintiff by making illegal strike and additional extension of work costs, etc.

B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) did not have a labor contract relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendants. According to the Act on the Protection, etc. of Temporary Agency Workers, Hyundai Motor and the Defendants have a labor contract relationship between Hyundai Motor and the Defendants, and the Defendants’ employer is a modern automobile, and the Plaintiff is merely a temporary work agency in the contract of temporary agency. The Plaintiff’s strike, such as strike by the Defendants, is just in order to implement it by refusing to demand collective bargaining against Hyundai Motor, the employer, and the other party to industrial action is a modern automobile, which is not the Plaintiff. In addition, even if the Defendants’ industrial action was caused by industrial action,

2. First of all, we examine whether the Plaintiff is the Defendants’ employer.

In light of the written evidence Nos. 5, 6, and 7, each of the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to exist between the Plaintiff and the Defendants.