The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff, including the part resulting from the participation.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is a corporation that is established on January 5, 2017 and ordinarily employs 440 workers and operates urban bus transportation business, and is a local public institution affiliated with the Sejong City City. The Plaintiff was employed by the Intervenor on February 27, 2017 and worked as a bus operator.

B. On May 26, 2018, the Plaintiff was subject to a disposition of removal from a position on grounds of bus departure interference, business interference, etc., and was subject to a disposition of suspension from office for three months (from September 18, 2018 to December 17, 2018) during the period of removal from the position (hereinafter “instant disposition of suspension from office”). The Plaintiff filed an application for relief with the Chungcheongnam-Nam Regional Labor Relations Commission on the ground that the instant disposition of suspension from office is unfair, and the Chungcheongnam-Nam Regional Labor Relations Commission accepted the Plaintiff’s application for remedy on March 18, 2019.

On June 26, 2019, the Intervenor filed an application for review with the National Labor Relations Commission, and the Defendant Committee revoked the above first instance judgment and rendered a decision that the suspension from office of this case is justified, and the new trial decision became final and conclusive.

(c)

On June 4, 2019, the intervenor rendered a disciplinary measure for one month of salary reduction (hereinafter “instant salary reduction measure”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff was dismissed on April 2, 2019 from the designated hours at the time of service at the morning and was put in by an emergency worker, etc., and the auditor did not comply with the request for attendance to verify the facts, and thus violated Articles 6, 17, and 19 of the Employment Regulations, Articles 15 and 18 of the Regulations on the Operation, etc. of Buses, and Article 19 of the Audit Regulations,” on the ground that “the Plaintiff violated the provisions of Article 6, 17, and 19 of the Rules on the Operation, etc. of Buses” (hereinafter “the instant salary reduction measure”).

(d)

On June 28, 2019, an intervenor entered a private chartered bus business entity without the intervenor's approval even though the plaintiff was a worker who was employed in the city bus transportation service, and operated a commercial vehicle without the intervenor's approval, and recommended other employees suspended from office to be employed double, and Article 17 of the Intervenor's Articles of Incorporation.