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 public enterprise that was established on December 31, 2004 and employs 28,000 full-time workers and engages in L Transport, Maintenance of L Vehicles, and Sales of L Equipment, etc. as its main business.

B. The MM trade union (hereinafter “M”) was established for the organization of workers engaged in the L industry including the intervenors, and the number of its members is approximately 20,000, and five local headquarters (Seoul, Daejeon, Permanent Residence, South, and Busan) under its control.

C. The intervenors entered the Plaintiff and worked at the places of business belonging to the Daegu and North Korean Headquarters, and are members of M.

In the case of intervenors 1 through 3, the position in M shall be the head of the branch office belonging to the Local Headquarters Dispute Countermeasure Committee, and in the case of intervenors 4 through 10, the position shall be the branch office belonging to the Local Headquarters Dispute Countermeasure Committee.

The Plaintiff: (a) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s disciplinary action (hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”) that “the Intervenor planned, attempted to, or participated in, the strike for twenty-four hours, which was an illegal labor dispute conducted by M on February 25, 2014 (hereinafter “the Intervenor”), constitutes either Article 6, 8, Articles 32, 33, 37, 38, and subparagraphs 1 through 5 of Article 52 of the Rules of Employment, and Article 32, Article 38, and Article 52 of the Rules of Employment (hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”) against the Intervenor on July 2014; and (b) notified the Intervenor upon the resolution of the disciplinary action; (c) the disciplinary action was mitigated by the Review and Disciplinary Committee; (d) the amount of the disciplinary action against the Intervenor 1 through 3 was reduced; and (e) the remaining intervenors became final and conclusive in February of each salary reduction.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant disciplinary action”), which became final and conclusive through the Review and Disciplinary Committee, is E.

On October 6, 2014, the Intervenor asserted that the instant disciplinary action was an unfair disciplinary measure and unfair labor practice, and filed an application for remedy with the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission (Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission) No. 2014da753/buno103.

The main purpose of the strike of this case on January 22, 2015 is complaint, accusation, provisional attachment and disciplinary action, and forced transfer and unilateral transfer.