The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 16, 2017, the Plaintiff became a member of the D Trade Union (hereinafter “instant trade union”) organized as an employee working at the instant company on March 10, 2017 when working as a member of the work on board as of February 16, 2017. The Plaintiff is a person who joined the D Trade Union (hereinafter “instant trade union”) organized as an employee working at the instant company on March 10, 2017, and the Defendant is a person who was elected as the chairperson from among the officers of the instant trade union

B. On September 5, 2018, the instant trade union notified the Plaintiff of the attendance of the Disciplinary Committee on the ground of the violation of the Trade Union Regulations, but the Plaintiff was not present at the said Disciplinary Committee held on September 12, 2018, and the instant trade union decided to take disciplinary action against the Plaintiff and publicly announced the same day.

On September 21, 2018, the instant trade union notified the Plaintiff to be present at the Disciplinary Committee. The reason for the attendance was as follows: “A person who intentionally violated the principles and bylaws of the instant trade union, by using newspapers, broadcasting, printed materials, or by spreading false information by other means, thereby impairing the reputation of the union members and the trade union; a person who has organized for the purpose of dualizing the organization; a person who committed an anti-organization for the purpose of organized confusion or destruction; or a person who commits an misunderstanding in violation of this part of the union members; and on September 28, 2018, by holding an extraordinary general meeting disciplinary committee for representatives, and by deciding to remove the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant expulsion disposition”).

C. On October 12, 2018, the Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for reexamination against the instant trade union. However, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s request for reexamination by refusing the attendance of the instant trade union disciplinary committee twice, thereby refusing to accept the request for reexamination.

Accordingly, on October 23, 2018, the Plaintiff is the head of Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (the competent administrative agency: the corporate support division; hereinafter “instant administrative agency”).