1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including costs incurred by participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff is a legal entity that establishes and operates the C University (hereinafter “C University”), and C University is an educational institution that is established in 197 and conducts higher education, such as college education, using approximately 180 full-time workers.

B. On March 5, 2001, the Intervenor entered into an employment contract with the Plaintiff and took charge of the operation of bus buses at C University, etc. on or around March 1, 2014, the term of the employment contract was from March 1, 2014 to February 28, 2015, and entered into an employment contract with the “facility support” (hereinafter “instant employment contract”).

C. On February 6, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Intervenor that the term of the instant employment contract expires as of February 28, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant notification”) D.

On May 6, 2015, the intervenor claimed that the notice of the expiration of the instant contract constitutes unfair dismissal and applied for remedy to the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission. On June 30, 2015, the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission rejected renewal of the instant contract without reasonable grounds even though the intervenor was granted the right to renew the instant contract to the intervenor on June 30, 2015, and accepted the Intervenor’s request for remedy.

E. On August 7, 2015, the Plaintiff appealed and filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission. However, on November 12, 2015, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered a decision of reexamination that dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination (hereinafter “instant decision of reexamination”).

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1, 2, and Eul 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

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

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The legal doctrine on the renewal of the right to fixed-term workers is the Act on the Protection, etc. of Fixed-Term and Part-Time Workers (hereinafter “fixed-term Act”).

It is the legal principles formed before this enforcement, and the fixed-term law explicitly states that "an employer may employ fixed-term workers within the extent not exceeding two years."