1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation established on July 5, 2007 pursuant to Article 4 of the K Corporation Act and Article 1-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the K Corporation Act, which employs approximately 128 full-time workers and operates business related to the management and operation of K.

The intervenors entered into an employment contract with the Plaintiff and performed L security services, etc. in the position of the police assigned for special guard.

B. As of August 2016, the Plaintiff organized the police assigned for special guard belonging to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “registered police officers”) into four sections (A, B, C, and D), and had the police assigned for special guard perform L guard duties for three subjects (eight hours per week, eight hours per week, and eight hours per week).

The Intervenor B, C, the Intervenor D, E, and F were affiliated with Article D.

C. On August 19, 2016, the Plaintiff ordered the police assigned for special guard belonging to D to D to attend a security training conducted between 18:00 and 19:30 on August 23, 2016, and the police assigned for special guard belonging to C to C to the police assigned for special guard belonging to C, from August 24, 2016 to 19:30 on August 24, 2016, and from August 18:0 to 19:30 on August 25, 2016 (hereinafter “instant security training”).

On August 22, 2016, the Plaintiff changed the security training schedule of the instant case, and ordered the police assigned for special guard belonging to D to D to attend the security training conducted from August 24, 2016 to 16:00, from August 25, 2016, from August 14:30 to 16:00, from August 25, 2016 to the police assigned for special guard belonging to C, and from August 26, 2016 to the police assigned for special guard belonging to B to attend the security training conducted from August 14:30 to 16:00.

However, on August 22, 2016, the police assigned for special guard, including intervenors, sent text messages to the police assigned for special guard, who did not undergo the instant security training because there was no time to meet the statutory working hours due to the erroneous organization of the plaintiffs, and there was no time to attend the instant security training. Therefore, the participants did not participate in the instant security training.

E. On March 29, 2017, the Plaintiff’s personnel committee held on March 29, 2017 did not participate in the instant security training by the intervenors.