1. The Central Labor Relations Commission’s dismissal on September 16, 2015 between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor’s Intervenor, which was unfair in turn.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff Company is a corporation that employs 100 full-time workers and engages in the game information providing industry, etc., and the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is a person who entered the Plaintiff Company and worked as the reporter of the e-sports team around November 2012.

B. On January 19, 2015, C, the reporter of the Plaintiff Company, filed a report with D, the editor of the Plaintiff Company, stating that D had already retired from the Intervenor and the Plaintiff Company, and D would refuse to participate in the Intervenor due to E’s political character, and that the Plaintiff Company would immediately retire from the Plaintiff Company because there was no vision such as annual salary increase or promotion.

C. D had an interview conducted from January 20, 2015 to January 13:43, 2015 to verify whether the intervenors made the same speech as that reported by C in the meeting room of the Plaintiff Company from January 20, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant interview”). During the instant interview, the Intervenor recognized the fact that he stated that he would have expressed an objection to the Plaintiff Company and retired from the police officer on February 2015, when compared to F, G, and C, who is an employee of the Plaintiff Company, who is an employee of the club staff of the Plaintiff Company. However, the Intervenor argued that D and E did not have the words “inhumanity relationship.”

D After the completion of the instant interview, around 17:30 on the same day, 17:30 on the same day, the intervenors demanded to submit written notice of dismissal, written notes, and written consent of dismissal and sign the written consent of dismissal.

However, the Intervenor raised an objection on the grounds that he/she has spreaded a question about D and E's in the notice of dismissal and each letter of dismissal presented by D, and D deleted the content that the Intervenor spreads a question about the relationship of inhumanity in the notice of dismissal and each letter of dismissal.

And after confirming the revised notice of dismissal and the contents of the letter, the intervenor "the principal works on the plaintiff company and the notice of dismissal."