1. The Intervenor’s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are borne by the Intervenor joining the Defendant.

3...

1. The Plaintiff sought the revocation of the instant decision on review that the instant suspension from office and the instant dismissal, which was rendered by the National Labor Relations Commission on March 6, 2018 at the first instance trial, are legitimate and disciplinary procedures exist, and that a disciplinary decision is appropriate.

The first instance court recognized the grounds for the suspension of office of the Plaintiff, and the dismissal of the instant case is lawful as well. However, the dismissal of the instant case is not recognized as a part of the grounds for the disciplinary action, and the dismissal of the instant case is unreasonable only by the grounds for the disciplinary action recognized as unlawful, and the part concerning the suspension of office of the Plaintiff’s claim of this case concerning the dismissal of the instant case

Only the Defendant’s Intervenor appealed against the above first instance judgment, and the Plaintiff did not file an appeal. As such, the first instance judgment on the suspension from office of this case becomes separate and conclusive, and the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the lawfulness of the instant decision on dismissal.

2. Although the quoted intervenor in the judgment of the court of first instance has several arguments in the trial, this is not significantly different from the contents of the allegation made by the intervenor in the first instance as more concrete or subdivided, and even if all the evidence submitted in the court of first instance and the court of first instance are examined, the plaintiff shall be deemed as the intervenor's employee, and even if part of the grounds for the disciplinary action against the dismissal of this case is not recognized, and the recognized grounds for the disciplinary action is unreasonable, and there is no objective evidence to acknowledge that the notice of dismissal was made in writing, the fact-finding and the

As argued by the Intervenor in the trial, even if it is acknowledged that the Plaintiff was notified in writing of the instant dismissal, part of the grounds for the instant dismissal is not recognized.