1. On September 11, 2015, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered a central order between the Plaintiff and H and the Intervenor joining the Defendant on September 11, 2015.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. Pursuant to Article 2(2) of the Local Autonomy Act, the Plaintiff is a local government that employs more than 620 full-time workers and operates the Dong-gu public health center as one of its business places while rendering public services, such as residents’ welfare and self-government administration. H and Defendant’s supplementary intervenors (hereinafter “Defendant’ supplementary intervenors”) are those who were employed as fixed-term workers in the Plaintiff throughout 2008 to 2010, respectively, and were notified of the expiration of the labor contract as of December 31, 2014.

B. On February 10, 2015, the Defendant Intervenor asserted that the notice of the expiration of the term of the labor contract rendered by the Plaintiff as of December 31, 2014 constituted unfair dismissal and filed an application for remedy with the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission.

A visiting health management project cannot be subject to the proviso of Article 4(1) of the Fixed-Term Act. Even if the above proviso is applicable, since the main sentence of Article 4(1) of the Fixed-term Act was applied from January 1, 2013 to the Ministry of Health and Welfare in accordance with the guidelines of the Ministry of Health and Welfare, the Intervenor joining the Defendant’s work for more than two years including the period before January 1, 2013 constitutes a case where the Defendant’s Intervenor entered into an employment contract without a fixed period of time.

In addition, in light of the fact that an employment contract has been renewed for several years, it is unfair to notify the Plaintiff of the expiration of the contract term in this case on the ground that the contract term as of December 31, 2014 has expired without reasonable grounds.

C. On June 2, 2015, Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission recognized the defendant’s assistant intervenor’s right to expect the renewal of his/her employment contract, and accepted an application for remedy for unfair dismissal on the ground that it is difficult to deem that there is a reasonable ground for the plaintiff’s refusal to renew the employment contract, on December 31, 2014.