1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The Plaintiff is operating a Korean-style restaurant with nine regular workers at Ansan-si from December 1, 2005 (hereinafter “instant restaurant”).

An intervenor is a person employed by the Plaintiff on March 8, 201 and served as the head of the cooking office of the instant restaurant by April 17, 2013.

On April 16, 2013, when the plaintiff unfairly dismissed him, the intervenor filed an application for unfair dismissal with the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission on May 16, 2013.

However, the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Intervenor’s motion with the agreement that the relationship between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor was terminated by the Intervenor’s declaration of intention to resign.

On August 6, 2013, the Intervenor appealed and filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission. On October 23, 2013, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered a decision on reexamination of this case to revoke the decision of the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission on the ground that the Plaintiff did not notify in writing the grounds and time of dismissal when the Intervenor dismissed the Intervenor and did not take effect.

【Ground of recognition】 The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the adjudication on reexamination of the instant case’s reexamination of the purport of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the entire purport of the pleading was concluded with the Intervenor for a fixed period of one year, but the contract was renewed once on March 2012, which was one year after the expiration of the contract, and the contract was renewed again at the expiration of the contract. As such, the labor relationship between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor was terminated on March 2013.

Therefore, the retrial decision of this case was unlawful because the intervenor did not have the benefit of remedy.

Although the Plaintiff proposed the “wages reduction and liability management system” to the intervenors due to the operational difficulties in the instant restaurant, the labor relationship between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor was concluded by unilaterally withdrawing from the dormitory provided by the Plaintiff after the Intervenor rejected it and expressed his intention of resignation.

Nevertheless, it is not possible.