1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit include the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

1. Causes and contents of the decision in the retrial;

A. The Plaintiff A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff A”) is a corporation that was established on October 5, 1976 and has its main place of business in the Ssung City and employs approximately 200 full-time workers and operates a water-driven manufacturing business, etc.

Plaintiff

B A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff B”) is a corporation that was established on May 31, 2005 and has its main place of business D at the time of harmony with approximately 50 full-time employees and engages in the business of manufacturing sanitary instruments.

B. The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is a trade union established by the Plaintiff’s employees A on July 27, 1987, and approximately 60 workers belonging to the Plaintiffs are currently subscribed.

C. On April 23, 2018, the Intervenor requested the Plaintiff to negotiate wages in 2018 in writing, and the Plaintiff did not publicly announce the fact of the Plaintiff’s request for bargaining, and on April 24, 2018, the Plaintiff applied for correction to the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission on April 24, 2018, stating that “The Plaintiff did not publicly announce the fact of the Intervenor’s request for bargaining for seven days from the date of the Intervenor’s request for bargaining.”

On May 4, 2018, the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission accepted the Intervenor’s request for correction on the ground that “The Intervenor is a trade union practically organizing the entire workers belonging to the Plaintiffs, and “E, the chairperson of the Intervenor, is a legitimate representative recognized as the representative from the Intervenor’s union members, and the Plaintiffs are obligated to publicly notify the Intervenor’s request for bargaining.”

E. On June 7, 2018, the Plaintiffs filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission.

On June 25, 2018, the National Labor Relations Commission cannot be readily concluded that the intervenor’s chairperson or representative is disqualified, and the party to the request for bargaining is not the chairperson of the labor union but the trade union to which the rights and obligations belong. The intervenor is operated in the form of the first business trade union of the two labor unions. Thus, the intervenor is the plaintiffs of the intervenor.