1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

The intervenor in the process of the instant decision was established on February 21, 2006 and employs 300 full-time workers and operates apartment security service business. The plaintiff asserts that the appointment was revoked unfairly from the intervenor on January 2, 2015.

The Plaintiff filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission on March 27, 2015, as the revocation of employment by the Intervenor on January 2, 2015, which was inappropriate. However, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for remedy on May 26, 2015 on the ground that “the Plaintiff and the Intervenor did not have a labor relationship, and thus, are not qualified as a party.”

On June 12, 2015, the Plaintiff applied for a review to the National Labor Relations Commission, but was dismissed on August 31, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant decision on reexamination.” On August 31, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking the revocation of the instant decision on reexamination with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on January 5, 2016 on the ground of the eligibility defects.

[Ground of recognition] The defendant's lawsuit of this case is unlawful since it was filed after the lapse of the period for filing a lawsuit. The defendant's lawsuit of this case is unlawful since it was without dispute, Gap's evidence 2, Eul's evidence 1-1 and 2's whole statement and the purport of the whole argument.

Judgment

According to Article 31(2) and (3) of the Labor Standards Act, an employer or employee who is dissatisfied with a decision on reexamination made by the National Labor Relations Commission shall file an administrative litigation within 15 days from the date of receipt of the written decision on reexamination, and if the administrative litigation is not filed within this period, the decision on reexamination shall

However, according to the statement No. 1 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff may lawfully receive the written adjudication on the retrial on September 16, 2015, and it is apparent in the record that the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit only after the lapse of 15 days from that date. As such, the instant lawsuit was filed after the lapse of the period for filing the lawsuit.