1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff is a non-corporate body established pursuant to Article 23(1) of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings for the purpose of carrying out a project relating to the management of “A” building and its site and its affiliated facilities (hereinafter “instant building, etc.”).

B. On April 29, 2010, the Plaintiff held a general meeting and appointed D as a manager.

However, the president, E, etc. of the “A” shopping mall (hereinafter only referred to as “the shopping mall”) in dispute with the Plaintiff surrounding the right to manage the instant building, etc. asserted that the said administrator’s appointment was null and void, and filed an application for provisional disposition suspending the performance of his duties with the Suwon District Court’s Sung-nam branch.

On August 13, 2013, the above court suspended the performance of the duties of D custodian and decided to appoint attorney F as acting person.

On September 26, 2013, F publicly announced that “The Intervenor shall be appointed as the temporary managing director of the instant building, etc.”

C. On November 11, 2013, F submitted an application to permit the resignation of an acting director to the above court, and on the same day, F publicly announced that “the appointment of a temporary management officer for an intervenor is withdrawn as of November 11, 2013.”

On December 23, 2013, the above court rendered a decision to change the acting representative from F to attorney G.

G on January 11, 2014, the G issued a public announcement stating that “ even if an existing employee has been engaged in the business even before a decision to replace an acting employee, it is difficult to view that he/she entered into a labor contract with a person with legitimate authority, and it does not recognize his/her status,” “existing employee is not entitled to pay remuneration even if he/she performs the business of the management body without consent from the foregoing” (hereinafter “public announcement as of January 11, 2014”).

The Intervenor was dismissed on January 11, 2014 from the Plaintiff on January 16, 2014.

The plaintiff is alleged to be "the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission."