1. The National Labor Relations Commission on January 31, 2017 between the Plaintiff and the Defendant joining the Defendant on January 31, 2016.

The Intervenor B entered the E-Si General Social Welfare Center (hereinafter “instant welfare center”) operated by the Korea Religious Organization Foundation on August 1, 2010, and the Intervenor C joined the instant welfare center on December 1, 2011 and served as the head of the operating support division, respectively.

A general trade union for intervenors is a trade union for workers engaged in public service business, etc., and an intervenor C is a member of a general trade union for intervenors.

The Plaintiff entered into an entrustment contract with E and the instant welfare center from January 1, 2015, and succeeded to the employment of the employees of the instant welfare center, including Intervenor B and C.

On May 26, 2015, the first dismissal and reinstatement of the Intervenor B and C established a specific audit plan related to the receipt and transfer of the General Social Welfare Center. From June 15, 2015 to June 24, 2015, the Plaintiff conducted a specific audit of the instant welfare center, F Welfare Center, etc. operated by the Plaintiff, and requested the Plaintiff to take heavy disciplinary action against the Intervenor B and C for the same reasons as the written reprimand.

On February 11, 2016, the Plaintiff was subject to disciplinary action B and C on the grounds of “inappropriate recruitment of employees, failure to operate the personnel committee, failure to operate the personnel committee, and improper contract for meal service companies” according to the aforementioned specific audit results.

On February 29, 2016, the Intervenor B and C asserted that the disciplinary dismissal against the Gyeongnam Regional Labor Relations Commission constituted unfair dismissal and applied for remedy.

On April 27, 2016, the Gyeongnam Regional Labor Relations Commission accepted an application for remedy filed by an intervenor B and C on the ground that it was unfair in violation of Article 27 of the Labor Standards Act, which provides the procedure for written notification.

The Intervenor B and C were reinstated on June 21, 2016.

The Plaintiff’s secondary dismissal and remedy procedures against the Intervenor B and C are based on the following reasons: “Inappropriate employment of employees, failure to operate the personnel committee, and improper contract of meal service companies” according to the result of the specific audit as of July 4, 2016.