1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

The details and details of the Re-Examination Decision are public enterprises established on December 31, 2004 and employing 28,000 full-time workers and engaging in transportation of railroads, maintenance of rolling stock, manufacture and sale of railroad equipment, etc.

A Trade Union (hereinafter referred to as the “AM”) was established for the organization of workers engaged in the railroad industry, including the Defendant’s Intervenor (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”), and the number of union members is about 20,000, and five local headquarters (Seoul, Daejeon, Permanent Residence, South, and Busan) are under its control.

The intervenors joined the plaintiff and served as the Seoul Headquarters, the Dong Branch of the Seoul Metropolitan Area, the Seobu Headquarters of the Seoul Metropolitan Area, the rolling stock maintenance group in the Seoul Metropolitan Area, and the Daejeon Railroad Vehicle Maintenance Group, and the members of the ANo-S. are members.

Part B (Attached 1) of the Intervenor B (Attached 1), the list of the Intervenor joining the Defendant, No. 129, is a chapter branch of the A Trade Union, and other intervenors are members of the A Trade Union.

On October 22, 2014, October 30, 2014, November 4, 2014, November 7, 2014, and November 7, 2014, the Plaintiff issued a disposition of suspension from office or reduction of salary as stated in the column for the grounds for disciplinary action against the intervenors pursuant to Articles 6 and 8 of the Rules of Employment of the Plaintiff and Articles 32, 33, 37, 38, and 52 subparag. 1 through 5 of the Rules of Employment for the following reasons:

(hereinafter “instant disciplinary action” (hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”). (1) Of the grounds for disciplinary action against intervenors 2, the intervenors indicated as “the primary strike” as “the participants” were participating in the illegal collective refusal of labor (hereinafter “the primary strike”) conducted by A Labor Union and Labor Relations Commission from December 9, 2013 to December 31, 2013.

② On February 25, 2014, the intervenors planned or participated in the second strike, which is the illegal labor dispute conducted by the Ano-help on February 25, 2014.

③ On February 17, 2014, the Plaintiff integrated the cargo train departure inspection and the exchange business.