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.

An intervenor in the process of the decision on reexamination is a person who employs approximately seven full-time workers in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, and operates a restaurant (hereinafter referred to as “instant restaurant”).

[Grounds for Disciplinary Action]

1. On November 27, 2013, the Plaintiff’s refusal to perform his/her duties (1) was on the same job, but the Plaintiff was on the duty of care as a customer, but the customer was on duty, and thereafter he/she was on duty. The Plaintiff’s intentional act, such as going out of the place of business, and intentionally prepared and brought about the Plaintiff’s work, by which the customer was inside the place of business, and by which he/she was in charge of his/her duties. However, the customer was on duty at a late time. (2) On January 16, 2014, the Plaintiff’s work was prepared and brought about several times, and the customer was not on duty. The Plaintiff’s repeated act was repeated on several occasions. The Plaintiff’s act of failing to perform his/her duties such as “non-report”, “non-report,” “non-report,” and the Plaintiff’s act of failing to perform his/her duties by intention, making it impossible for the president to refuse to perform his/her duties such as cleaning up 14.

2. On November 27, 2013, the Plaintiff did not submit this document even if he/she did not comply with the direction of the president, in violation of the duty of good labor, or intimidation (1) and did not submit the same document until the end, despite the demand of the president that he/she would bring about the curriculum and identification card after his/her entry (2) November 28, 2013, the Plaintiff, despite the retirement time of 06 hours, is consistent with the Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the direction of the president without the consent of the superior and the president. On January 16, 2014, the Plaintiff did not perform it or intentionally neglect (3).