The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

All the costs of lawsuit, including the part arising from the supplementary participation, shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that employs approximately twenty full-time workers and engages in the business of manufacturing general and similar products, and the Defendant’s Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is a person who joined the Plaintiff on March 9, 2015 and worked as the team leader of the Plaintiff’s business division.

B. On February 23, 2016, the Plaintiff notified the Intervenor that “the labor contract concluded on March 9, 2015 by the Plaintiff and the Intervenor shall be terminated on March 8, 2016 as the term of the labor contract expires” (hereinafter “Notification of the termination of the instant labor contract”).

C. On April 25, 2016, the Intervenor filed an application for remedy with the Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission, asserting that the notice of the expiration of the instant labor contract constituted unfair dismissal.

On June 13, 2016, the Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission accepted the Intervenor’s request for remedy to the effect that “the termination of employment relationship on the grounds of the expiration of the term of employment contract constitutes unfair dismissal, as the Plaintiff and the Intervenor concluded an employment contract without fixing the term of employment.”

On July 20, 2016, the Plaintiff appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission and filed an application for review seeking the revocation of the ruling of the relevant Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission.

(hereinafter “instant review”). On October 13, 2016, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered a judgment dismissing the said request for review with the same purport as the determination of the said Regional Labor Relations Commission (hereinafter “instant review judgment”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 4, 19 (if there are virtual numbers, including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 3 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is lawful

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1 concluded an employment contract with the Intervenor, which set the term of the employment contract, and notified the Intervenor of the expiration of the term of the employment contract in this case.

Therefore, the term of the employment contract between the plaintiff and the intervenor is not fixed, and the term of the employment contract in this case expires.