1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including costs incurred by participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The parties concerned 1) Daedo Transport Co., Ltd. is a company that operates a taxi transport business by employing approximately 67 full-time workers from 11, Seo-gu, Daegu-ro 21-ro, Daegu-ro 21, and Dong-ro 21-ro 27, Seo-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-ro 21-ro 27 to run a taxi transport business (hereinafter referred to as "large-do Transport Co., Ltd. and Dong-dong Transport Co., Ltd.").

(2) The Plaintiff is a nationwide industrial trade union established on May 4, 200 for the employees engaged in taxi transport business, etc., and has 81 branches and 2,970 members under the Daegu Regional Headquarters, such as the Do Transportation Division and the Dong Transportation Division. The Plaintiff has 81 branches and 2,970 members, and the higher organization is the Korea Labor-Management Federation of taxi Workers' Unions.

3) The Defendant Intervenor Supplementary Transport Trade Union is a company-level trade union established on September 29, 201. The Defendant Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s trade union is a company-level trade union established on July 1, 201 (hereinafter “ Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Dol Transport Trade Union”) and the said trade union is collectively referred to as “participatings”.

(B) (1) The Plaintiff became a representative bargaining trade union at each of the instant employers’ workplace around January 201, following the process of simplification of bargaining windows with the intervenors on December 1, 2011.

2) On May 23, 2013, the Plaintiff is an organization to which the right of negotiation is delegated by the Daegu taxi transport business association (75 taxi companies located in Daegu Metropolitan City including the instant users) by regional joint bargaining method.

The wages and collective agreements were concluded in 2013.

On July 30, 2013, the intervenors filed an application for correction on the ground that “The provision that only the Plaintiff allocates the limit of working hours to the Plaintiff” in the collective agreement concluded on May 23, 2013 with the Daegu taxi transportation business association constitutes a violation of the duty of fair representation.”