1. On June 20, 2018, the National Labor Relations Commission filed an application for reexamination of unfair dismissal remedy between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor joining the Defendant.

Details of the Review Decision

A. The Plaintiff is a juristic person established on March 2, 2002 for the purpose of efficiently constructing, managing, and operating an airport in accordance with the AD Corporation Act to facilitate air transport and to carry out the business of fostering and supporting the aviation industry, which employs approximately 2,100 full-time workers, and carries out the development business, etc. of an airport (excluding D Airports; hereinafter the same shall apply) and its neighboring areas.

B. On December 3, 2012, the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) concluded a labor contract with the Plaintiff as a fixed-term employee (E), and renewed the contract on a two-year or one-year basis, and served at the Plaintiff’s overseas planning team and overseas business team.

C. On November 27, 2017, the Plaintiff notified the Intervenor that “the term of employment contract expires as of December 2, 2017 and does not renew the contract any longer”.

(hereinafter “Notification of Termination of the instant employment contract”) D.

The Intervenor filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission by asserting that the notice of termination of the instant labor contract constitutes unfair dismissal.

On March 22, 2018, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission received an application for remedy from an intervenor to the effect that “the notice of the termination of the instant labor contract constitutes unfair dismissal, inasmuch as the intervenor entered into a labor contract with a fixed period of time, but the renewal right is recognized and there is no reasonable ground for rejection of renewal.”

E. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an application for review with the National Labor Relations Commission.

On June 20, 2018, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered a decision dismissing the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination with the same purport as the initial inquiry tribunal.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant decision on reexamination”). (No dispute exists with the ground for recognition, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the entire pleading, and the relevant laws and regulations, etc. of the instant decision on reexamination are as shown in the attached Form.

Facts of recognition

Article 9 is amended by Act No. 9067 on March 28, 2008 by the current status of the promotion of the plaintiff's overseas business and the details of the appointment of the intervenor.