1. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of litigation shall include those resulting from a supplementary participation.

The reasons for the decision of reexamination and the designated parties are those who jointly run the manufacturing industry of the consigned with the trade name of 56 full-time workers at the Busan Seo-gu, Busan (hereinafter referred to as the “instant workplace”).

An intervenor is a person who was employed as a commissioned worker while entering the instant workplace on April 16, 1998 and serving as a park, and entered into a commission work contract with the instant workplace on June 30, 201 after he retired from office on June 30, 201, every year from July 1, 201 to July 1, 201.

(2) On July 1, 2014, the Plaintiff and the designated parties notified the Intervenor of the termination of the labor contract relationship as of July 1, 2014 due to the expiration of the term of the instant labor contract. On May 31, 2014, the Plaintiff and the designated parties expressed that the Intervenor should separately notify the Intervenor of the termination of the labor contract, taking into account the Intervenor’s working attitude, the company’s contribution to the company, etc., and that the Intervenor would not renew the contract if there is no separate notice prior to July 1, 2014 (hereinafter “Notification of the expiration of the instant labor contract”). The Intervenor asserted that the Intervenor was unfairly dismissed as of July 1, 2014, and the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission filed a request for remedy with the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission for reexamination on the ground that the Intervenor’s right to expect renewal of the labor contract is recognized, and that there is no justifiable ground for rejection of the renewal thereof. However, the Plaintiff and the designated parties of the instant request for reexamination (hereinafter the same shall apply).