(C)The revocation of the disposition imposing enforcement fines;

A Stock Company

Gyeongnam Regional Labor Relations Commission

Changwon District Court Decision 201Guhap1670 Decided December 1, 2011

July 5, 2012

September 27, 2012

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

1. Purport of claim

On March 30, 2011, the Defendant revoked the disposition imposing B enforcement fines against the Plaintiff. 2. The purport of the appeal is to revoke

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. The part citing the judgment of the court of first instance

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) and (b) of Article 2-3(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act are the same as the reasoning for the first instance judgment, except for the dismissal under paragraphs (2) and (3) of the same Article; and (b) thus, the reasoning for this Court’s explanation shall be cited as it is in accordance with Article

2. The part to be mard;

(a) Paragraph 2-c. 9 of Article 2-2 shall be advanced as follows:

9) Accordingly, on July 29, 2011, the chairperson of the National Labor Relations Commission appealeded against the above judgment by Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu25465, but was sentenced to the dismissal of appeal on January 11, 2012, and the Supreme Court was also sentenced to the dismissal of appeal by the Supreme Court Decision 201Du4036 Decided June 28, 2012, and the above judgment of the first instance became final and conclusive as it is.

B. Paragraph 2(d)(d) is as follows:

According to the circumstances and facts of recognition of the above disposition, the disposition of this case is deemed to be a ground for disposition that the plaintiff cannot be deemed to have fully implemented the payment order equivalent to the amount of the payment order of this case, and since the Seoul Administrative Court Decision 201Guhap853 decided that "the part concerning the payment order equivalent to the above payment order of this case is revoked" became final and conclusive as it is, the disposition of this case is also unlawful."

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is so decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge, senior judge

Judges Hand-man

Judges Cho Jae-man