On May 18, 2018, the Defendant imposed three-month disciplinary action against Plaintiff A on May 18, 2018, and against Plaintiff B on May 18, 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 15, 1986, Plaintiff A entered the Defendant who runs broadcasting business, etc. on December 1, 1994 and worked as a camera.

In December 2012, the defendant, as a reorganization of the organization, established a news gathering center that supervises the department of the political, economic, social, and two departments, where the reporters and reporters belong, under the jurisdiction of the news gathering station.

B. The Defendant establishes three trade unions, including the Korea Trade Union E headquarters (hereinafter “Article 1”), the F Trade Union, and the G Trade Union (hereinafter “Article 3 Trade Union”).

On August 8, 2017, the 100 and H video reporters’ association filed a complaint with the prosecutor’s office for suspicion, such as unfair labor practices, against the Defendant, against the Defendant, who was the head of J and the head of the news gathering center, and K, the head of the news gathering center, and the head of K, who had been the head of the news gathering center at the time, filed a complaint against the prosecutor’s office, for the following reasons: (a) the Defendant’s Kamer reporters’s analysis and evaluation of their tendency by dividing them into class 4 according to the company’s loyalty and the degree of participation in labor union; and (b) the document “satise’s tendency” (specific contents are as indicated in attached Table 1; hereinafter referred to as “documents of this case”) prepared inside the Defendant, and there was any disadvantage in various personnel affairs.

C. Since January 8, 2018 to March 22, 2018, the Defendant’s Audit Board conducted “L audit” to clarify the suspicion of executing the instant documents.

The audit result determined that the plaintiffs participated in the preparation and execution of the documents of this case, and that the defendant personnel committee requested the disciplinary action against the plaintiffs.

Based on the above audit results, on May 3, 2018, the Defendant’s personnel committee opened a personnel committee for the Plaintiffs to hear the Plaintiffs’ vindication, and then decided to take three months of suspension from office on May 14, 2018. On May 18, 2018, the Defendant’s personnel committee notified the Plaintiffs of the review results of the above content (referring to the document of this case) as follows:

b.0.0 c.