1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit shall include costs resulting from the participation.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is a corporation that was established on April 1, 1981 and employs approximately 77 full-time workers in D and carries on the taxi transport business.

Plaintiff

B was a person who re-entered in the participating company on December 17, 2012 and served as a taxi driver, and the taxi branch A branch of the Plaintiff Public Transport and Social Services Workers' Union (hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiff trade union") was established on May 22, 2013 as a regional trade union organized by the employees of the Plaintiff Public Transport and Social Services Workers' Union (hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiff trade union") was 11 members, and three members of the participating company including the Plaintiff B.

B. On October 31, 2013, the Intervenor Company rendered a disposition to change the shift system from the first to the second-class system from November 3, 2013 to two persons (hereinafter “instant order”). Plaintiff B filed complaints with the instant order and refused to take a taxi, following the resolution of the Disciplinary Committee on November 22, 2013, the Intervenor Company issued a disposition to suspend working on board for two months from November 25, 2013 to January 25, 2014 (hereinafter “instant disposition to suspend working on board”).

C. On December 20, 2013, the Plaintiffs asserted that “the instant order for the assignment and the suspension of service on board constitutes an unfair disciplinary action and unfair labor practice.” D.

On February 13, 2014, the Gyeongbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission rejected Plaintiff B’s application for remedy against the instant dispatch order on the same grounds, and dismissed all the remainder of the Plaintiffs’ application for remedy.

(hereinafter referred to as the "First Inquiry Tribunal").

The Plaintiffs appealed against this and filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission on March 5, 2014, and the National Labor Relations Commission implemented the first system with 24 employees belonging to the Intervenor Company on May 12, 2014, and thus, it can be deemed that the instant order for assignment is unfair.