1. On September 2, 2016, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered the Central Labor Relations Commission’s remedy for unfair dismissal between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is a company that employs approximately 150 full-time workers to conduct market research and data research services.

On April 28, 2014, the Plaintiff was employed by the Intervenor and worked as a member at the rms management team in the rmscandling service sector.

B. On August 28, 2015, the Plaintiff submitted a resignation notice to C director, who is a superior managing msphers team.

C. The Plaintiff offered a resignation by suggesting the change of position and submitting a resignation by the C director, which is not only by mistake or coercion, but also by mistake or coercion on November 30, 2015 on the premise of a change of position, and despite the Intervenor’s withdrawal of his/her intention on November 6, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the termination of the employment relationship with the Plaintiff constitutes unfair dismissal, and filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission on February 25, 2016. However, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission voluntarily submitted a resignation by the Intervenor on May 10, 2016, terminated by the agreement, and dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for remedy on September 4, 2015, since the Intervenor accepted the resignation of the Plaintiff’s prior resignation on September 4, 2015.

On June 22, 2016, the Plaintiff appealed and applied for a review to the National Labor Relations Commission, but the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed it on September 2, 2016.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant decision by reexamination”). 【No dispute exists, entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Under the Plaintiff’s assertion, the labor relationship between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor cannot be deemed to have been terminated by the termination of agreement, and this constitutes a substantial dismissal, and thus, the prior review decision in this case is unlawful on a different premise.

The plaintiff has been under pressure to resign while being bullyingd.