1. On October 12, 2012, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered relief from unfair labor practices between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff is a company established on September 1, 2006 and engaged in the business of manufacturing semiconductor parts using 620 full-time workers and 620 full-time workers.

The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) is a national-level industrial trade union established under the organization of workers who work in the nationwide metal industry, and is established under the control of the branch of the Korean Metal Trade Union B branch (hereinafter referred to as the “branch of this case”).

B. On June 9, 2010, the instant branch commenced a strike upon demanding the guarantee of full-time officer treatment, etc., and withdrawn from the strike on May 25, 2011.

(hereinafter “instant strike”). On February 24, 2012, on February 24, 2012, the Plaintiff dismissed 75 employees C, etc. (hereinafter “instant workers”).

(hereinafter referred to as “instant dismissal”). C.

The instant workers asserted that the dismissal of the instant case was unfair, and the Intervenor asserted that the dismissal of the instant case was unfair labor practices and applied for remedy against unfair dismissal and unfair labor practices to the Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission on March 7, 2012.

However, on May 30, 2012, the Plaintiff revoked the dismissal of the instant workers on the said remedy procedure.

On May 31, 2012, the Gyeongbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the application for remedy against unfair dismissal by the instant workers on the ground that there is no remedy interest, and dismissed the Intervenor’s unfair labor practices which are disadvantageously treated in the Intervenor’s application for dismissal on the ground that the ground that the ground for dismissal can not be deemed to be merely the surface room for dismissal, and dismissed the application for remedy against unfair labor practices which are controlled and taken place after the lapse of the period of remedy.

On June 28, 2012, the intervenor dissatisfied with the above initial inquiry court and applied for reexamination to the National Labor Relations Commission, and the National Labor Relations Commission treats the dismissal of this case at a disadvantage on October 12, 2012.