1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal, including the part arising from the supplementary participation, are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

1. The contents asserted by the Plaintiffs in the trial of the first instance are not significantly different from the contents alleged by the Plaintiffs in the first instance court, and even if examining these claims together with the evidence submitted by the first instance court and the first instance court, it is difficult to recognize that the Intervenor was subject to the intention of unfair labor practice and was subject to disciplinary action against the Plaintiff A against the instant dismissal, the fact-finding and determination by the first instance court that the part of unfair labor practice in the instant judgment of the first instance is lawful is justifiable.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court concerning this case is as follows: “The chief of the judgment of the court of first instance deemed as having been a large number of participants” in the 7th table inside the 9th page of the judgment of the court of first instance; “The chief of the judgment deemed as having been a large number with the Plaintiff A”; “Nando” in the 11-12 table inside the 9th page table as “a leading or leading,” and “the degree of pledge” in the 17th page 22 as “the rules of the company” or “the rules of the company,” and thus, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Therefore, this is cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of

2. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claim of this case should be dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is justified, the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.