1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Facts of recognition

The plaintiff is a member of the Korean Metal Trade Union who is the chairman of the trade union of the defendant's smuggling factory (hereinafter referred to as "the defendant factory"). The defendant is a company that manufactures and sells valves, assembly metal pipes, etc., C is the children of defendant representative director D, and the actual operator of defendant factory.

At the time of acquiring a factory of E Co., Ltd., the Defendant dismissed a majority of the employees who were in charge of the manufacturing process of the said factory, including the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking nullification of dismissal against the Defendant around September 2013, and was confirmed as workers through mediation in the said litigation procedure.

Around June 2014, the Defendant: (a) sold all Nipp and the manufacturing process facilities to “F; and (b) ordered workers working in the relevant facilities to resign the Defendant and to re-enter the Defendant into “F”; (c) however, some workers including the Plaintiff refused to do so; and (d) left the Defendant.

On October 2014, the Defendant came to suspend part of business on the ground of business deterioration, and paid a shutdown allowance equivalent to 70% of the average monthly wage to the Plaintiff who is under suspension of business pursuant to the Labor Standards Act.

On July 24, 2015, the Disciplinary Committee of the Defendant’s dismissal against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Disciplinary Reason 1”) decided to punish the Plaintiff on the ground of ① verbal abuse, assault, intimidation, etc. in the workplace against the order of deceptive scheme (the fact that it was subject to criminal punishment based on the said matters, etc.) and ② verbal abuse, etc. against the existing factory site, etc., but the Defendant was subject to disciplinary action on the ground of the fact that there was no opening and continuous violence, intimidation, etc. are aggravated (hereinafter “Disciplinary Reason 2”), and the Defendant was subject to disciplinary action on July 30, 2015.

The parts related to this case among the defendant's rules of employment in the relevant provisions are as follows.

§ 38. Members are: