1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal, including the part arising from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiff citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from those asserted by the plaintiff in the court of first instance, and even if all evidence submitted by the court of first instance and the appellate court are examined, the judgment of the court of first instance dismissing the plaintiff

Therefore, the court's explanation on the instant case is consistent with the reasoning of the first instance court's decision, except where the first instance court's decision is used as stated in the following Paragraph 2. Thus, this court's explanation is based on Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts 2, 6 to 13, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, and 3, are as follows.

A. On February 23, 2016, the Plaintiff submitted documents necessary for supporting city bus drivers, including resumes, to the intervenors.

Meanwhile, from February 26, 2016 to March 4, 2016, the Intervenor publicly announced the recruitment of general urban buses and middle-term drivers, and in relation to the working conditions, the said public notice included the following: “after an interview: Determination after an interview, working conditions: Consultation on Work Day.”

B. On March 16, 2016, the Plaintiff received uniforms, membership cards, etc. from the Intervenor upon contact with the Intervenor C, and received them from the Intervenor on March 17, 2017. On March 17, 2017, the Plaintiff was on board a bus operated by a regular driving personnel affiliated with the Intervenor and received route education. From March 18, 2017 to the following day, the Plaintiff sent uniforms and employee certificates, and shut down the bus routes designated by the Intervenor under the instruction of the regular driving personnel affiliated with the Intervenor.

After hearing the fact that the plaintiff had worked as a bus driver in B, another bus company, from other drivers, the intervenor confirmed that the plaintiff had worked in B.

In Chapter 3, Chapter 15 of the "each entry" means "each entry and the results of fact-finding on the Gwangju Metropolitan City Mayor." Part 4-6 of the Chapter 4-6 of the "(the plaintiff needs to be from her to her)," as follows. "The city bus of Gwangju Metropolitan City is located as claimed by the plaintiff."