The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

All costs of lawsuit, including the part arising from the participation in the subsidy, shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff is a stock company established on April 17, 1964 for the purpose of issuing D.

On December 1, 2009, the intervenor joined the plaintiff and served as the reporter of the digital news team in the editing station.

B. On July 12, 2019, the Intervenor was notified of the resignation submitted by the Intervenor to the Vice President of the Plaintiff on July 8, 2019 from the team leader E, the team leader affiliated with the Plaintiff on July 12, 2019 that the resignation was accepted and disposed of.

(c)

G trade unions to which the Intervenor and the Intervenor participated in the labor union asserted that the above notification of the termination of the labor relationship constitutes unfair unfair treatment of interests and unfair labor practices such as control and intervention, and filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission.

The Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission, on October 22, 2019, submitted a written resignation of an intervenor on October 22, 2019, constitutes an offer to terminate an agreement on labor contract and voluntarily withdrawn before the employer gave his/her consent. Therefore, termination of the relationship of employment based thereon constitutes an dismissal and the termination of the relationship of employment was not notified in writing at the time of such dismissal. Therefore, the above dismissal is unfair, but does not constitute unfair

Determination (H/I consolidation, hereinafter “the first instance judgment of this case”) D.

The plaintiff, the intervenor, and the G Trade Union were notified of the decision of the first instance court of this case and applied for the review to the National Labor Relations Commission.

On March 9, 2020, the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed all applications filed by the Plaintiff, Intervenor, and G trade union for review on the same ground as the instant initial trial ruling (C/J; hereinafter “instant decision on review”). The facts that there is no dispute as to the grounds for review (the grounds for recognition), the entries in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is legitimate

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) In full view of the motive and circumstance of the Intervenor’s written resignation and the circumstances after the submission of the written resignation, it is evident that the Intervenor had the intention to terminate the conclusive labor relationship at the time of the submission of the written resignation. As such, the Intervenor’s resignation