1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are all borne by the Defendant, including those resulting from the supplementary participation.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Article 19 of the Disciplinary Punishment Regulations provides that no request for disciplinary action and resolution shall be made at the expiration of six months from the date of occurrence of the grounds for disciplinary action.

However, the Plaintiff passed a resolution on disciplinary action against an intervenor including the grounds that occurred before April 11, 2016, which was limited to six months' time limit of disciplinary action on October 10, 2016, which was held by the Disciplinary Committee, and thus the resolution on disciplinary action against the intervenor is null and void.

Even if some of the resolution of the instant disciplinary action is valid, the Intervenor’s grounds for disciplinary action may only be the act of spreading false information that “G secured a clear evidence that the person who stolen the instant goods was D, but D concealed it from the executive body of the instant trade union” to J around August 16, 2016.

B. The Plaintiff confirmed the grounds for disciplinary action against the Intervenor was determined as the grounds for disciplinary action against the Intervenor stated in the explanation on the grounds for disciplinary action that the grounds for disciplinary action were stated in subparagraphs 2 and 17 of the award rules.

However, the first instance judgment, based on the minutes of the disciplinary committee, added “when the order of workplace is confused,” which is not specified in the grounds for disciplinary action, is deemed unlawful since the dismissal of this case is deemed justifiable.

C. In light of the fact that a part of the disciplinary action against the Intervenor is not recognized as a ground for abuse of the authority to take disciplinary action, and there are circumstances to consider the circumstances leading to the Intervenor’s defamation, and that the Intervenor’s misconduct was not directly damaged to the Plaintiff, the instant disciplinary action is unlawful as it is an abuse of the authority to take disciplinary action.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The time limit for holding a disciplinary committee in a collective agreement with the Do and whether to take disciplinary action is stipulated.