1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. An intervenor is a corporation that ordinarily employs more than 400 workers and operates services such as facility expenses, facility management, maintenance and repair, etc. The Plaintiff entered into an employment contract with the intervenor on January 31, 2013 with the terms of the contract from January 23, 2013 to January 23, 2014, and worked as the security guard, etc. of Namyang-ju B apartment.

B. On September 16, 2013, the Intervenor held a disciplinary committee against the Plaintiff solely on the ground of the Plaintiff’s work attitude and decided to dismiss the Plaintiff as of October 16, 2013. On October 1, 2013, the Intervenor expressed his/her intent to terminate the instant employment contract to the Intervenor, thereby dismissing the Plaintiff.

C. On November 29, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for remedy against unfair dismissal with the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission. However, on January 24, 2014, the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for remedy on the ground that the labor relationship was terminated due to the expiration of the term of the labor contract, and the Plaintiff filed an application for review, but the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the application for reexamination on May 2, 2013 for the same reason.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the decision on retrial is lawful;

A. In a case where an employee under Article 30(3) of the Labor Standards Act does not want to return to the original position as well as the Plaintiff’s assertion of the original position, the relief benefit as a monetary compensation system constitutes a remedy benefit for unfair dismissal.

Therefore, since the plaintiff has a benefit of relief from unfair dismissal, the judgment of the retrial of this case was unlawful on different premise.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. (1) Determination (1) In this case, where the term of a labor contract for relief interest exists, a labor relationship between the parties to a labor contract shall naturally be terminated without any separate measures such as dismissal of an employer upon the expiration of the term, unless there are special circumstances, and Supreme Court Decision 95Da5783 delivered on August 29, 196.