1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance for the acceptance (including the rejection or addition) of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following judgments, since the court of first instance for the reasons of this case is the same as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

Parts 2, 15, " September 26, 2017" shall be applied to " September 28, 2017," respectively.

B. The Plaintiff asserts that the retirement age provision of the Defendant collective agreement amended on June 28, 2016 does not apply to the Plaintiff for the following reasons.

1) The Plaintiff’s collective agreement (hereinafter “instant collective agreement”) amended on June 28, 2016 after the instant dismissal, as amended by the Defendant’s collective agreement (hereinafter “instant collective agreement”).

(2) As of June 28, 2016, when the instant collective agreement was amended as of June 28, 2016, the Plaintiff dismissed on November 11, 2015 (it is prohibited from joining an association) pursuant to Article 3 subparag. 3 of the instant collective agreement, separate from the recognition of “worker” status due to unfair dismissal, and thus, the instant collective agreement does not apply to the Plaintiff.

3) The application of the retirement age provision of the instant collective agreement to the Plaintiff solely on the ground that the above dismissal was unfair even though the instant collective agreement was not complied with properly, and the Plaintiff was dismissed from the Defendant and was unable to participate in the amendment process of the instant collective agreement. As such, it is unreasonable to apply the retirement age provision of the instant collective agreement to the Plaintiff on the ground that the dismissal was unfair, and thus, it would be unreasonable to transfer to the Plaintiff without any disadvantage caused by the Defendant’s cause attributable to the Plaintiff. Therefore, at least at the time of dismissal, the rights under the collective agreement applied at that time to the Plaintiff in order to protect the Plaintiff’s trust