1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all the Plaintiff.

An intervenor in the status of a party to the instant ruling is a company that employs more than 600 full-time workers and engages in services such as construction design, urban design, construction supervision, etc., and the Plaintiff is a person who entered the Intervenor on December 7, 2009 and performed the duties of telecommunication CM and construction management.

On March 31, 2014, the intervenor notified the Plaintiff that the labor contract was terminated on the same day according to the expiration of the term of the labor contract.

(2) On June 19, 2014, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for remedy on August 12, 2014, by asserting that the notice of termination of the instant labor contract was unfair.

On September 2, 2014, the Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the above initial inquiry tribunal of the National Labor Relations Commission, filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission on September 2, 2014, but the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination on the ground that “the labor contract between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor cannot be deemed converted into an employment contract without a fixed period of time under the Act on the Protection, etc. of Fixed-Term and Part-Time Workers (hereinafter “fixed-term Act”), and that the labor relationship between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor was duly terminated due to the expiration of the contract term.”

(2) The plaintiff argues that the plaintiff's notice of termination of the contract of this case on the ground that the termination of the contract of this case is unfair, and thus, the decision of this case should be revoked unlawfully on the ground that the plaintiff's notice of termination of the contract of this case on the ground that the termination of the contract of this case is unfair.

Inorganic contracts;