1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff is a non-profit religious institution established on September 25, 2009 under C religious organizations, which employs 13 pastors and 9 full-time workers, and carries out the business of pastors and administration and support necessary therefor.

B. Since October 1, 2016, B worked as the president of D Child Care Center (hereinafter “Child Care Center”), the Child Care Center was closed on or around March 14, 2017, and the employment relationship of B was terminated around this time.

(hereinafter “instant termination of employment”). C.

B Under the premise that the Plaintiff is an operator of the child-care center of this case who employs himself as the operator of the child-care center of this case, the Plaintiff asserted that “the termination of the labor relationship of this case, which the Plaintiff unilaterally notified the closure of the child-care center of this case, constitutes an unfair dismissal.” On June 13, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for unfair dismissal remedy with the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission.

On August 22, 2017, the Gyeongnam Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the above application of B on the ground that “the Plaintiff appears to have impliedly recognized the termination of the labor relationship in the process of the agreement on the closure of the child care center in this case and the closure of the child care center in this case, and it does not have any benefit of remedy for unfair dismissal, as it is impossible to reinstate B’s original status as a member of the child care center in this case.”

B On September 27, 2017, the National Labor Relations Commission filed an application for review.

On December 8, 2017, the National Labor Relations Commission revoked the first instance trial court on the ground that “the Plaintiff is an employer B, and the Plaintiff’s workplace continues to exist as it is and can be reinstated due to full-time employment of administrative human resources. Therefore, it cannot be deemed that there was an implied declaration of intention to voluntarily resign. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s unilateral termination of labor relations constitutes dismissal, and the Plaintiff’s unilateral termination of labor relations constitutes dismissal, and thus, constitutes unfair dismissal.”