1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal, including the part arising from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. The grounds for the plaintiff's assertion in the court of first instance after the appeal do not differ from the contents of the plaintiff's assertion in the court of first instance, and the judgment of the court of first instance that rejected the plaintiff's assertion even if the plaintiff's newly submitted evidence Nos. 40 through 57 (including the number of pages) were presented in the court of first instance.

Therefore, the court's explanation of this case is based on Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the addition of the following judgments on the plaintiff's repeated assertion, and therefore, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. The further determination of this Court

A. After having set up a provision on retirement age under the Rules of Employment as of January 1, 2006, the intervenor in the summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion did not apply the same strictly. From January 1, 2001, the Plaintiff concluded a commission employment contract with all employees who have exceeded retirement age for one year.

Therefore, it is recognized that the plaintiff has a legitimate expectation that he/she will maintain the labor relationship by concluding a commission contract with the intervenor even after retirement age.

Nevertheless, it shall be deemed unfair to refuse to conclude a commission employment contract only with the plaintiff without justifiable grounds, and it shall be deemed unfair to be unfair to the contrary. This is also an unfair labor practice inasmuch as the intervenor is deemed to have failed to perform the plaintiff's trade union activities and is in accordance with the purpose of obstructing

B. The rules of employment of the first intervenor on January 1, 2006 explicitly stipulate that the arrival of the retirement age is a ground for ipso facto retirement. However, Article 17(2) provides that “A person, who is deemed particularly necessary in the course of performing his/her duties, may be extended notwithstanding the provisions on retirement, or employed under special conditions, such as commission and adviser.”

The above provision shall, even if a worker becomes retired ipso facto after he reaches the retirement age, be set at the time it is deemed necessary by the intervenor.