1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

On June 26, 2009, the Plaintiff was established on June 26, 2009 by taking over C Co., Ltd. (D Co., Ltd. changes its mission on or around 2002) and operated taxi transportation business with approximately 70 full-time workers.

On November 11, 1998, the intervenor joined D Co., Ltd. as a taxi engineer and served as D Co., Ltd., and on June 26, 2009, when D Co., Ltd changed its mission to C Co., Ltd., the intervenor worked as a taxi engineer belonging to the Plaintiff from the time it was acquired in the Plaintiff on June 26,

On December 16, 2004, the intervenor was elected as the chairperson of the C Trade Union (three years of office) and was re-selected four times thereafter, and from February 16, 2010 to the chairperson of the E Trade Union A branch (hereinafter “instant branch”).

On July 11, 2018, the Plaintiff notified the intervenors that they will be treated as retirement after the retirement age was first taken on August 10, 2018, and again notified the Intervenor that the employment relationship was terminated from August 10, 2018 to the expiration of retirement age.

(hereinafter “instant dismissal”). On September 5, 2018, the Intervenor filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission by asserting that “the instant dismissal is an unfair and unfair labor practice that treats unfair dismissal and disadvantage.”

On November 5, 2018, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the part of the Intervenor’s application for remedy on the ground that “The termination of a labor relationship based on the retirement age is unfair without justifiable grounds, and it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff terminated a labor relationship in order to put the Intervenor at a disadvantage in his/her legitimate trade union activities,” on the grounds that “the Plaintiff and the Intervenor agreed to continue a labor relationship after the Intervenor’s retirement age without any agreement on the period of the labor contract; and there was no ground to support the Plaintiff’s assertion that the retirement age was extended by one year; and that the termination

On December 11, 2018 and December 15, 2018, the Plaintiff and the Intervenor appealed and filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission.

The National Labor Relations Commission's retirement age on February 28, 2019 shall be the chairperson.