1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 22, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a labor contract with the Defendant with the contract term from February 22, 2016 to March 31, 2017 (including other allowances) and from March 31, 2017 (hereinafter “instant contract”). From the same day, the Plaintiff was working as the Defendant’s secretariat, and the Defendant’s regular employees are the Plaintiff.

B. C was elected as the president of the Defendant through an election in 2016 and performed the president’s duties from April 1, 2016.

C. On June 29, 2016, the Defendant’s board of directors decided to dismiss the Plaintiff as the Defendant’s secretary-general on the ground that it is inappropriate to perform its duties, and the Defendant notified the Plaintiff on the same day.

On July 11, 2016, the Defendant paid 1.8 million won ordinary wages of 30 days to the Plaintiff.

E. Meanwhile, Article 9 of the instant contract provides that the term “the contract of this case may be terminated upon the occurrence of a business-related problem, such as health, neglect of work, failure of work, etc.” under the terms and conditions for termination of contract, and the other reasons for termination shall be governed by the rules of employment of the Association (Federation).” Article 51 of the Rules on Work and Remuneration for D’s Social Workers provide that “the Committee” may dismiss a worker if there is a justifiable reason to deem that it is difficult to maintain a labor relationship any longer by social norms (Article

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 14, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the assertion was to perform without fail the defendant's duties as the secretary general under the contract of this case.

The defendant's dismissal on June 29, 2016 is null and void since there is no justifiable reason.

B. As seen earlier, the fact that the Defendant’s regular employees are the Plaintiff.

The defendant does not apply Article 23(1) of the Labor Standards Act that the defendant is a workplace which employs not more than four full-time workers, and that the employer shall not dismiss the worker without any justifiable reason, and pursuant to Article 661 of the Civil Act.