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. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that ordinarily employs approximately 150 workers and engages in the ship manufacturing business, etc.

The Intervenor(C) is a person who has joined the plaintiff from December 29, 2015 to work for the plaintiff.

W. Written References (comprehions)

3. The representative D of the plaintiff will maintain the employment contract with the intervenor by the age of 65 (the end of July 2021) regardless of the retirement age and wage peak system under the rules of employment.

However, if a participant is unable to perform his/her duties under the direction of the representative of the plaintiff due to his/her failure to pass through the standards (if the result of the inspection is inappropriate, the contract for employment of the representative of the plaintiff D and the intervenor may be terminated.

In addition, when the plaintiff goes bankrupt due to unavoidable reasons and operational difficulties, the matters of the labor contract are automatically discarded.

(b)

6. The representative D and the intervenor must maintain each other's confidentiality even after the termination of the employment contract on the violation of the Labor Contract Act and the facts he/she became aware of in their membership in the Plaintiff, and no civil or criminal objection is raised in any content.

7. We will be unable to implement any agreed matter between them or be subject to any punishment if there is a violation.

B. The Intervenor filed a complaint with the Gwangju Regional Employment and Labor Office on the ground of the failure to sign working conditions and the reduction of wages. On June 20, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Intervenor concluded a written agreement to revoke the above complaint. The main contents of the written agreement are as follows:

(hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement of this case").

On October 18, 2017, the Plaintiff held a disciplinary committee and decided the suspension of office for three months against the Intervenor on the ground of “inciting workers and violating the duty of confidentiality,” “disseminating false facts related to F’s overdue wages,” “f’s defamation and interference with business by false complaint against G.”

The plaintiff is an intervenor on January 4, 2018.