1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. Of the costs of appeal, the part resulting from the intervention is the Intervenor joining the Defendant.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, citing the instant case, is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the parts to be used or added as follows and the part to be claimed by the defendant and intervenor, which are emphasized by the court of first instance, except for the following additional parts, and thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence

(Other matters alleged by the Defendant and the Intervenor in the trial does not differ significantly from the contents alleged in the first instance court, and even if all the evidence submitted in the first instance and the trial are examined, the fact-finding and judgment by the first instance court that rejected such assertion by the Defendant and the Intervenor is justifiable). [In addition, “the Plaintiff” in the second 2th 18th 2nd 18th 201 is added.

In the third page of the judgment of the court of first instance, the plaintiff added "No. 3, 2018." to "No. 3, 2018."

3. On July 9, 2018, the Plaintiff added the 7th page below the judgment of the first instance.

On the 3rd page of the judgment of the first instance, the phrase “compliance with the consultation procedures” cannot be deemed to be “uncompliance with the consultation procedures” under the 9 to 10th page.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (based on recognition) is as follows. Paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court of first instance (based on the third side of the judgment of the court of first instance) is as follows.

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Gap evidence Nos. 3-4 through 6, Gap evidence No. 4-2, 3, 10, and 11-2, 3, 10, and the whole purport of the pleadings, the court of first instance held that "On the other hand, the plaintiff was given a warning of violation of the duty of good faith and the duty of maintenance of dignity by the intervenor on August 26, 2016."

5th 5th 10th 10th 5th 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 2

The reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the judgment.

[Reasons for Recognition] Part of the judgment of the court of first instance (as shown below 1, 2) is as follows.