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 disposition;

A. The Intervenor is a person operating the Jeju Hospital located in Jeju City (hereinafter “instant hospital”), and the Plaintiff is a person who entered the instant hospital as an emergency medical technician on January 19, 2004 and worked for the said hospital as an emergency medical technician.

B. On December 24, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that the Intervenor’s order to drive an emergency vehicle when the Intervenor went beyond the legitimate scope of duties of an emergency medical technician and the causes for the transfer of patients, blood transportation, and returning patients home to another hospital constituted unfair personnel order and unfair transfer, and filed an application for remedy against unfair dismissal with the Jeju Regional Labor Relations Commission (hereinafter “ Jeju Labor Relations Commission”).

However, on March 7, 2014, the Jeju Labor Standards Commission rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s application for remedy on the ground that “The order of the Intervenor to drive an emergency vehicle upon the Plaintiff’s arrival of patients, blood transport, discharge patients, etc. does not constitute abuse of rights, and thus, it cannot be deemed an abuse of rights under Article 23(1) of the Labor Standards Act.”

C. On March 27, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for review of the instant decision of dismissal with the National Labor Relations Commission (hereinafter “China”). However, on June 11, 2014, the Middle Labor Relations Commission ordered the Intervenor, including the Plaintiff, to perform the duties of receiving blood during the hours other than the duties of an emergency medical technician, and cannot be deemed to constitute an unfair personnel order or an abuse of rights, as it violates the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Labor Standards Act, and does not constitute an abuse of rights. Thus, it was erroneous for the Plaintiff to dismiss the application despite the dismissal of the Jeju Labor Relations Commission, but the conclusion is the same in that it rejected the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination, and thus, the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination is dismissed.”