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 January 11, 200, the Plaintiff served as a member of the Trade Association and worked from April 1, 201 to May 8, 2017 at the Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) partnership from April 1, 201, and the Intervenor is a corporation established for the purpose of enhancing the agricultural productivity of its members, promoting the expansion of markets for agricultural products produced by its members and facilitating their distribution, and providing technology, funds, and information to its members.

On May 8, 2017, the Intervenor dismissed the Plaintiff as grounds for disciplinary action “Embezzlement of right to exchange farming materials, embezzlement of money awarded to the Daejeon Regional Headquarters, embezzlement of sales proceeds, embezzlement of educational assistance expenses, embezzlement of corporate cards, private use of corporate cards.”

(hereinafter “instant disciplinary dismissal”). On July 20, 2017, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant disciplinary dismissal constituted unfair dismissal, and filed an application for remedy with the Chungcheong Regional Labor Relations Commission. On September 13, 2017, the Chungcheong Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for remedy by deeming that “the grounds for disciplinary action are recognized and the disciplinary action is appropriate.”

On October 20, 2017, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the above initial inquiry tribunal and applied for reexamination to the National Labor Relations Commission. However, on December 14, 2017, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered a decision dismissing the Plaintiff’s application for reexamination on the same ground as the initial inquiry tribunal.

(hereinafter “instant decision on reexamination”). On January 15, 2018, the Plaintiff was served with the written decision on reexamination.

[Grounds for recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and 8, and the purport of the entire argument as to the legitimacy of the decision on reexamination of this case as to May 4, 2017, the plaintiff's assertion that the decision on reexamination of this case is legitimate, is appointed as a personnel committee member on February 5, 2016. According to the personnel regulations of the intervenor, the term of office of the personnel committee member was one year, and the term of office of the above personnel committee member was terminated on February 5, 2017.