1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant’s disciplinary dismissal disposition against the Plaintiffs on May 20, 2010 is invalid.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 1, 198, the Plaintiff A joined the Defendant Union and suspended on August 1, 2004 through February 9, 2010, and supervised the overall business of the Defendant Union while working as the former business of the Defendant Union until a standby is issued to the Life-long Business Office. The Plaintiff B, from November 1, 2004 to June 17, 2007, was in charge of the management affairs as a credit manager of the Defendant Union, from June 18, 2007 to February 14, 2010, and was in charge of the management affairs as a branch office from January 5, 2010 to D branch office.

B. On May 13, 2010, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries notified the Defendant Cooperative to take three months of suspension from office against the Plaintiff and three months of reduction in salary against the Plaintiff A, after conducting an audit against the Defendant Cooperative.

C. On May 20, 2010, the Defendant Union attended 8 of the nine members of the personnel committee on May 20, 2010 in accordance with the above disciplinary notice, and opened a personnel committee. The Plaintiff’s disciplinary action against the Plaintiff A as a ground for disciplinary action to change the prohibition of unjust loan employees using the name of another person who is negligent in acquiring fixed assets, and the disciplinary action against the Plaintiff B as a ground for disciplinary action to change the prohibition of unjust loan employees using the name of another person who is negligent in acquiring fixed assets, and to change the prohibition of unjust loan employees using the name of another person who is negligent in acquiring fixed assets, and then set a confidential vote as to the amount

The personnel committee chairperson confirmed 8 copies of the ballot paper for the plaintiff A and 8 copies of the ballot paper for the plaintiff B before the personnel committee members. In accordance with the opinion of the personnel committee members, only the ballot paper indicating the same amount of disciplinary action for the purpose of guaranteeing the status of the personnel committee members and protecting their confidentiality, 5 copies of the ballot paper indicating the amount of disciplinary action against the plaintiff A as "Disciplinary dismissal" and 5 copies of the ballot paper indicating the amount of disciplinary action against the plaintiff B to the personnel committee members, and the personnel committee members present consented thereto.

Through this procedure, the defendant union.