1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including those resulting from the participation, shall be all included.

1. The circumstances leading to the decision on reexamination of this case

A. The Intervenor Union was established on November 20, 1990 and joined the Korea Air Transport Union Federation affiliated with the Korea Air Transport Union Federation as a unit trade union consisting of 920 workers engaged in loading and unloading at the ports of Ulsan-si, including the Plaintiffs.

The Intervenor Union is supplying its members as daily workers to the harbor transport enterprises (Seoul Metropolitan Government Co., Ltd.) in Ulsan District with the permission of labor supply business from the head of the Busan District Office for the head of the Ulsan District Office.

B. From July 1, 2011, the Plaintiffs were allowed to establish multiple labor unions in accordance with the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act (hereinafter “Trade Union Act”). On August 8, 2011, the branches of the National Democratic Transport Industry Workers’ Union affiliated with the National Federation of the National Federation of Workers’ Unions established the Ulsan Port Democratic Police Headquarters of the Korea Transport Industry Workers’ Union (hereinafter “newly established association”), and Plaintiff A and Plaintiff D were elected respectively in G.

C. On August 12, 201, the Plaintiffs did not withdraw from the Intervenor Union even after the Intervenor Union joined the new association to maintain an opportunity for employment through the labor supply business conducted by the Intervenor Union, and on the ground that the Intervenor Union established a new association and joined the labor union twice, the Intervenor Union made a disposition of suspending employment against Plaintiff A, B, C, and D (hereinafter “each of the instant dispositions of suspending employment”) on August 13, 201, and subsequently dismissed the Plaintiffs on August 23, 2011.

(hereinafter “each of the instant expulsion”) D.

On September 2, 2011, the plaintiffs asserted to Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission that each of the dispositions of this case and each of the dispositions of this case constituted unfair dismissal and unfair labor practices, and applied for remedy. The Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission was not the plaintiffs' employer, and therefore the intervenor union was unfair and unfair.