1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Causes and contents of the decision in the retrial;

A. The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is a company established on January 11, 2002 and engaged in security service business, etc.

On June 2014, the intervenor was entrusted by the council of occupants' representatives with the management affairs of the apartment of this case at the time of Suwon-gu, Suwon-si (hereinafter "the apartment of this case").

(Period of Entrustment: From June 1, 2014 to May 31, 2015; hereinafter referred to as “instant entrusted management”). (b)

On July 5, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a labor contract with the Intervenor (hereinafter “Contract Period”): from July 5, 2014 to September 30, 2014; and from contract occupation: Contract occupation: Apartment Facility Security.”

After that, the Plaintiff concluded a labor contract with the Intervenor twice again, and the expiration date of the final labor contract is “ May 31, 2015.”

(hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant employment contract”). C.

On April 7, 2015, an intervenor was signed by eight employees of the expense, including the plaintiff, on the "Notice of the Termination of Employment Contract" with the following contents:

(2) On May 31, 2015, the employee agreement of the instant apartment security guards is terminated on May 31, 2015. Accordingly, the employee resignation should be replaced by the notice of the termination of the employment contract (Attachment) and any objection is not raised against the Labor Standards Act, civil, and criminal liability.

On June 23, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for remedy with the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission for the instant notification, and on August 21, 2015, the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the application for remedy on the ground that “the Plaintiff is not entitled to renew the instant labor contract.”

On September 23, 2015, the Plaintiff appealed and filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission. On December 17, 2015, the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the application for reexamination on the same ground.

hereinafter referred to as "the decision of review of this case"

.....