1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

On April 17, 2002, the Plaintiff organized the D Branch on June 12, 2019, as an industrial trade union at a national level, which was established with the organization of workers in the area south of Gwangju, and organized D Branch (hereinafter referred to as the “instant Branch”).

140 members currently belong to the above sub-council.

The intervenor is a quasi-governmental institution established on May 1, 1995, which ordinarily employs approximately 9,50 workers, including 6,90 people in general service, 1,660 people in general service, 1,660 workers in general service, and 9,50 workers in fixed-term service, to improve the health of industrial workers and promote the welfare of workers.

There are six regional headquarters, 54 branch offices, 6 committees, human resources development institutes, call centers, etc. under the interventions.

On August 12, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an application to divide the Intervenor’s call center’s public service counselor into a separate negotiating unit and applied to the former Southern Regional Labor Relations Commission for a separate bargaining unit.

On September 10, 2019, the Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application on the ground that there is a significant difference in working conditions between the public service counselor at the call center and the public service counselor at the call center and the public service worker at the call center, and there is no practice of negotiations separately between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor. In addition, the joint bargaining trade union re-endorses the authority to negotiate the wage agreement for the public service worker at the call center to the E-Trade Union to which part of the public service counselor at the call center was affiliated in 2019 and it is highly probable that negotiations will be conducted including the public service counselor at the call center in the future.

On October 16, 2019, the Plaintiff appealed and filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission. However, the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination on November 15, 2019 on the same ground as the above initial decision.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant decision on reexamination”). [This case’s ground for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 1, and the purport of the entire pleadings.