1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. All of the plaintiffs' lawsuits of this case are dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) or the Intervenor Company was engaged in the business of collecting and transporting household wastes in five Eup/Myeon, including D, using 25 full-time workers in Ulsan-si, Ulsan-si. The Plaintiff was engaged in the business of collecting and transporting household wastes in five Eup/Myeon. The Plaintiff A and the Plaintiff B were employed in the Intervenor Company on September 3, 2012, and they were engaged in the business of collecting and transporting household wastes.

B. On July 29, 2013, the Intervenor notified the Plaintiffs that the term of each labor contract expires as of August 31, 2013.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant notice”). (c)

On September 5, 2013, the Ulsan Regional Joint and Several Labor Union (hereinafter “instant Trade Union”) to which the Plaintiffs and the Plaintiffs joined filed an application for remedy with the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission by asserting that the instant notification constituted unfair dismissal and unfair labor practices.

On October 14, 2013, Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission recognized the right of renewal and accepted a request for remedy against unfair dismissal on the grounds that there is no reasonable ground for rejection of renewal, and dismissed a request for remedy against unfair labor practices on the ground that there is no other evidence in addition to dismissal.

The plaintiffs and the labor union of this case filed a petition for review on the part of unfair labor practices during the first inquiry court, and the intervenor appealed against the unfair dismissal part during the first inquiry court.

On January 13, 2014, the National Labor Relations Commission revoked the unfair dismissal part of the first inquiry court on the ground that the right to renew the application is not recognized, and subsequently dismissed the application for remedy by the Plaintiffs, and made a decision of reexamination to dismiss the application for review of the labor union of this case with the Plaintiffs on the ground that there is no clear presentation of evidence regarding unfair labor practices (hereinafter “instant decision of reexamination”).

[The basis for recognition] / [the fact that there is no dispute, and Party A.