1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. On December 3, 2018, the Plaintiff was a juristic person operating the facility security business, etc., and merged A with approximately 900 full-time workers, who operated the facility security business, etc.

An intervenor is a person who joined A on January 28, 1994 and served as the head of the center at the Bupyeong Marketing Center from January 1, 2017.

B. A shall hold a personnel committee on July 28, 2017 and receive money from the president of the elected branch, and ② “center policy expenses” shall be used as monetary rewards to employees within the center, and center operating expenses (all event expenses, meal expenses, etc.).

On the other hand, the center's operating expenses budget is paid monthly separately from the center's policy expenses budget.

The Court decided to dismiss the Intervenor on July 31, 201, based on the grounds for disciplinary action (hereinafter referred to as the above grounds for disciplinary action) as follows: misappropriation of operating expenses, 5 use of funds for members related to the CSS’s event, 6 demand and acceptance of personal support funds at the time of exercising the Center, 7 receipt of gifts from the members, 8 professional appearance proceeding utilizing the members’ money, 9 bodily contact and inappropriate remarks that constitute sexual harassment, 00 won, 00 won, 100 won, and 100 won.

C. On August 16, 2017, the Intervenor appealed to the above disciplinary dismissal, and filed a request for reexamination with A, and A decided to open a review personnel committee and to maintain the dismissal of the Intervenor’s disciplinary action against the Intervenor. On August 18, 2017, the Intervenor notified the Intervenor of the disciplinary dismissal in accordance with the decision of the personnel committee for reexamination.

(hereinafter referred to as the "instant disciplinary action") d.

The Intervenor filed a petition for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission that the instant disciplinary action constitutes unfair dismissal.

The Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission(Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission) on November 27, 2017(2) of this case.