1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff is a public corporation that ordinarily employs approximately 8,00 workers and carries out the business of supplying housing and land.

On January 23, 2013, an intervenor joined the Plaintiff as a fixed-term worker and served in the Seoul Regional Headquarters B, etc., and was transferred to a business cooperation worker (inorganic contract worker) on January 2, 2015, and served in the same headquarters C.

B. Around February 7, 2018, D, an employee of the Plaintiff, reported that “A participant has committed sexual assault and sexual harassment to himself/herself, and he/she spreads false facts about the relationship between the Intervenor and himself/herself.”

Accordingly, the Plaintiff investigated the case of grievance counseling from February 23, 2018 to March 18, 2018.

C. On March 27, 2018, the Plaintiff Civil Service Commission decided to dismiss the Intervenor on the ground that: (a) the Intervenor contacted the elevator with D on November 28, 2017, and attempted several calls to D (hereinafter “instant 1 act”); (b) the Intervenor talked about the relation with D, including the fact that the Intervenor had sexual intercourse with D with other employees (hereinafter “instant 2 act”); and (c) the Intervenor’s act constitutes “sexual harassment” that may cause sexual humiliation; (d) the Intervenor’s dismissal of the Intervenor on the ground that there was a disciplinary cause violating Article 48 of the Personnel Regulations. The Plaintiff dismissed the Intervenor on March 29, 2018 (hereinafter “instant dismissal”).

The Intervenor asserted that the instant dismissal constituted unfair dismissal, and applied for remedy to the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission. However, on August 20, 2018, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Intervenor’s request for remedy on the ground that the grounds for disciplinary action against the Intervenor was recognized and the disciplinary action is appropriate.

Seoul 2018 Daz. 1547, hereinafter referred to as the "First Inquiry Tribunal of this case"). e.

The intervenor in this case.