1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The Inspector of the Review Decision is a corporation that employs more than 1,300 full-time workers and operates multi-family housing cleaning security service business, etc., and the Plaintiff was employed by the Intervenor joining the Intervenor’s Intervenor on December 1, 2013 and served as security guards of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Apartment Complex C (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

On August 18, 2014, the Plaintiff submitted to the Intervenor, as of August 31, 2014, a resignation as the date of retirement, and as of August 31, 2014, a resignation as the grounds for retirement (hereinafter “instant resignation”). The Intervenor accepted the resignation and then dismissed the Plaintiff on August 31, 2014.

On September 15, 2014, the Plaintiff asserted that the Intervenor’s termination of the labor relationship as of August 31, 2014 was unfair and applied for remedy to the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission. However, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the application for remedy on November 13, 2014 on the ground that “the termination of the labor relationship was made by the Plaintiff’s declaration of intention of resignation, and thus cannot be deemed as dismissal.”

C. The Plaintiff filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission on December 2, 2014, but the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the application for reexamination on the same ground as the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission on January 28, 2015.

(2) The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the retrial ruling of this case as to the following facts: (a) there was no dispute; (b) Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2; and (c) Eul evidence Nos. 2; and (c) the purport of the entire pleadings; and (d) the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the retrial ruling of this case, in the course of an interview with the management director during the course of an accident occurred on the apartment of this case, only prepared and submitted the pertinent resignation report at the request of the head of the

Inasmuch as an intervenor terminated a labor relationship by a unilateral intention, it shall be deemed unfair and unfair. On the contrary, the instant decision on review was unlawful.

Facts of recognition

In August 17, 2014, the main actors work around the fourth apartment house of this case where the Plaintiff had been working around the new wall.