1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including costs incurred by participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. The following facts may be acknowledged if there is no dispute between the parties, or if the whole purport of the pleadings is added to each of the statements in Gap evidence of 1 to 3, and Eul evidence of 1 to 3 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply).

The plaintiff is a foreign national, foreign child, or other Korean national who has established and operated a curriculum from a kindergarten to a high school, with approximately one hundred full-time workers in the Busan-gun, Busan-gun, Busan-gun, which was established in around 1983.

Sheshe joined the Plaintiff on May 3, 2010 and served as B, and was notified by the Plaintiff on August 13, 2013.

B. (i) Around May 1, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a labor contract with the Intervenor during the period of employment from May 3, 2010 to July 31, 2012. During the said employment contract period, the Plaintiff again entered into a labor contract with the period of employment from August 14, 2011 to August 13, 2012.

Then, the Plaintiff concluded a labor contract with an intervenor during the contract period from August 14, 2012 to August 13, 2013 following the expiration date of the above labor contract.

(hereinafter “instant employment contract”). On the other hand, on June 3, 2013, the Plaintiff issued a written notice of dismissal to the Intervenor on the ground that the Intervenor’s failure to work in cooperation with other employees, such as weakening the authority of the senior executive officer, failing to work in cooperation with other employees.”

On June 7, 2013, asserting that the above dismissal was unfair, the intervenor filed an application for remedy with the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission (Resan 2013da324). On August 8, 2013, the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission ruled on August 8, 2013 that the above dismissal was unfair, and that the worker was in the original position.

C. On August 12, 2013, the Plaintiff, who was determined by the pertinent Regional Labor Relations Commission as above, ordered the Intervenor to reinstate from office as of August 13, 2013.