1. On March 30, 2018, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered unfair suspension from office between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor in the Central 2018.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that employs approximately 16 full-time workers and engages in trade business, etc., and the Intervenor was employed by the Plaintiff on June 27, 2016 as an internal business management director.

B. On July 21, 2017, the Plaintiff held a disciplinary committee against the Intervenor on the grounds of physical dispute within the workplace. On September 19, 2017, the Plaintiff decided two months of suspension from office against the Intervenor (from September 30, 2017 to November 29 of the same year) and notified the Intervenor of the decision. The details of the act subject to disciplinary action and the disciplinary action stated in the written suspension from office are as shown in attached Table 1.

(2) The grounds for suspension from office are as follows. (3) The grounds for suspension from office (hereinafter “the grounds for suspension from office in this case”) stated in the attached Form 1 are followed by the number.

On November 29, 2017, without holding a separate disciplinary committee, the plaintiff made a decision to dismiss the intervenor's disciplinary action and notified the intervenor of the decision. The acts subject to disciplinary action listed in the written disposition for dismissal of the disciplinary action are as specified in attached Table 2.

(F) The dismissal of the instant case (hereinafter referred to as the “instant dismissal”), and the detailed grounds for disciplinary action as set out in the attached Form 2 are in line with the number (hereinafter referred to as “the grounds for disciplinary action against the instant dismissal”).

On October 31, 2017, the first intervenor, including the progress of the remedy procedure, filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission to the effect that the suspension of office of this case constitutes an unfair disciplinary action, and subsequently, on November 31, 2017, the dismissal of this case constituted unfair dismissal, adding the purport of the application to the effect that the dismissal of this case constitutes unfair dismissal.

On December 27, 2017, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission recognizes only the grounds for the suspension from office as justifiable grounds, and the disciplinary action is excessive compared to the grounds for the suspension from office.

The dismissal of this case is identical or justifiable with the grounds for the instant disciplinary action.