beta
Text
1. On July 9, 2018, the National Labor Relations Commission applied for review of unfair suspension from office between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor.
Reasons
1. Circumstances and relevant facts of the decision on reexamination;
A. The status of the parties and the Defendant’s Intervenor’s work experience 1) are corporations that ordinarily employ approximately 5,000 workers and conduct plant construction business, etc., and the Plaintiff is the Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”).
A) On June 1, 2011, the Plaintiff is a person who has been employed and worked for the Plaintiff. On June 1, 201, the Seoul Headquarters’s integrated order team procurement and management (the steel processing management, steel framed purchase) Seoul head office on February 1, 2011, when the issuing department works for the Plaintiff. On February 1, 2011, the Seoul Headquarters’s integrated order team procurement and management (the steel framed management, steel framed purchase) Seoul head office on April 23, 2014 through June 23, 2014, the estimate management of the Industrial Environment Headquarters’s head office, which was dispatched to the domestic site on June 30, 2015, the costs necessary for the receipt of the project ordered by the business owner on the domestic site dispatch on July 1, 2015, and the Plaintiff’s head office was performing the work as the Plaintiff’s specialized inspection agent’s materials on December 24, 2015.
After joining the plaintiff, the division of the intervenor's service, the affairs in charge, the place of service, etc. shall be as follows:
3) On August 201, the Intervenor included in the “D Project”, which is a project for the construction of Aluminium pressure facilities conducted by the Plaintiff in Saudi Arabia, and deemed that there is no problem as to the delay in the supply of steel materials. On November 27, 2011, the Intervenor raised a problem to the upper part, such as reporting to the Vice President around November 27, 2011. Division DD C C C C C C C C C C C C4, which was received by the Intervenor from 2012 to 2016, as shown below.
B. Each personnel order and disciplinary action against the Intervenor 1) On October 10, 2017, the Plaintiff’s Industrial Environment Support Group E is the head of the Plaintiff’s Industrial Environment Support Group E, respectively.