The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff, including the part arising from the supplementary participation.

Details and details of the retrial ruling

A. The Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) employs approximately 13,50 full-time workers under the M&B headquarters as the department store business headquarters, M&A headquarters, R&B business headquarters, Siinema business headquarters, H&B business headquarters, and as the company engaged in general distribution business.

B. The Defendant Intervenor B (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) served as an employee employed by the Plaintiff Company on October 25, 2002 as the employee in charge of the operation of the Steering Department and Food & Drug Department from February 9, 2012, which belongs to the headquarters of the Mart Business Headquarters.

The Intervenor Trade Union (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor Trade Union”) is an enterprise unit trade union established on October 12, 2015 for the organization of workers who work at the headquarters of the Plaintiff Company’s marina Business, and its superior organization is the D E-Trade Union Federation.

The Intervenor B shall be the chairman of the Intervenor Trade Union from the time of its establishment.

C. On October 19, 2016, the Plaintiff Company (hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”) issued a one-month disciplinary action against the Intervenor B on November 9, 2016, on the grounds that the following disciplinary grounds were stated in the list of the grounds for disciplinary action (hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”).

On September 7, 2016, the Intervenor B sent mobile phone text messages (hereinafter “instant text messages”) containing false information on the Plaintiff Company’s grounds for disciplinary action (hereinafter “instant grounds for disciplinary action”) to the employees of the Plaintiff Company, “I did not have any answer, but did not comply with the legal procedures for the simplification of representative bargaining union under the conditions of multiple union members,” and “F Organization’s labor union text messages (hereinafter “instant text messages”) containing false information that “I would not comply with the legal procedures for the simplification of representative bargaining union.”

The Intervenor B, who violated the Information Protection Guidelines (hereinafter “Disciplinary Reason 2”), was the text message of this case.