1. On October 29, 2018, the National Labor Relations Commission filed an application for reexamination of unfair suspension from office between the Plaintiff and the Defendant joining the Defendant.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that ordinarily employs approximately twenty-four workers and runs a general food business.

On November 10, 2015, the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) is a person who was employed by the Plaintiff and performed the duties of parking management and maintenance of facilities in the restaurant located in the Busan-gu Office (hereinafter referred to as the “instant restaurant”).

B. On April 20, 2018, the Plaintiff, following the Disciplinary Committee, conducted two-month disciplinary action against the Intervenor on the ground that “(i) the case related to ① November 20, 2017, ② the case related to the Masan on December 25, 2017, ③ the case related to the purchase of winter, ④ the case related to the false information spread,” as the grounds for the disciplinary action.

(2) The grounds for the disciplinary action of this case are the grounds for the disciplinary action of this case (hereinafter referred to as the "instant disciplinary action"), and the "in total, the grounds for the disciplinary action of this case" are the grounds for disciplinary action of this case.

The intervenor applied for remedy to Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission because the disciplinary action of this case constitutes an unfair disciplinary action.

(hereinafter “instant application for remedy”). On June 29, 2018, Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission rendered a judgment dismissing the instant application for remedy on the ground that “The instant disciplinary action is justifiable, since all of the grounds for the instant disciplinary action are recognized and the amount of disciplinary action is not excessive.”

D. (hereinafter “The First Inquiry Tribunal”) D. D.

The intervenor appealeded in the initial inquiry court of this case and applied for review to the National Labor Relations Commission.

On October 29, 2018, the National Labor Relations Commission revoked the initial inquiry court of the instant case on the ground that “only the grounds for the first or third disciplinary action among the grounds for the instant disciplinary action is recognized as justifiable grounds. This case’s disciplinary action was imposed on the grounds that the intervenor cannot be deemed to have expressed an intent to commit a theft in relation to the grounds for the second disciplinary action, etc., compared to the grounds for the instant disciplinary action, and thus, constitutes an unfair disciplinary action, and accepted

(C) The retrial ruling of this case (hereinafter referred to as the “instant review ruling”).