On March 5, 2015, the Central Labor Relations Commission (Central 2014, 969, 979/buno147) unfairly and unfairly disciplinary action against the Korea Railroad Corporation.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Defendant Intervenor’s Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) is a public corporation that employs approximately 28,00 full-time workers and carries out railroad transport business, rolling stock maintenance business, etc.

B. The Plaintiff G Labor Union (hereinafter “Plaintiff G Labor Union”) was established under the organization of the Intervenor and the employees engaged in the railroad industry, and the number of its members is about 20,000, and five local headquarters (Seoul, Daejeon, Permanent Residence, South, and Busan) under its control.

C. The plaintiffs except the plaintiffs Gamno (hereinafter "the plaintiffs related to the disciplinary action of this case") are the workers of the intervenor, and their duties in the intervenor and the plaintiff Gamno are as listed below.

(E) The position of the Plaintiff Intervenor in the position of the Plaintiff Intervenor: Plaintiff AH Vehicle Management Union I; the Central Committee for Countermeasures against Disputes; K of HH Agency Offices and the Department of Staff B; the Department members J of the Central Committee for Countermeasures against Disputes M of the L Station; the Department members D N Office Electric UnionO; the Department members of the Central Committee for Countermeasures against Disputes; Q of the P Vehicle Management Institute of the EP Vehicle and the Department members of the Central Committee for Countermeasures against Disputes; the Department members of the Central Committee for Countermeasures against Disputes Q Q, the Department of Vehicles of the FP Office of the F Office of the Motor Vehicle Management and the P Vehicle Branch

D. On February 28, 2014, the Intervenor took each disciplinary measure against the Plaintiffs regarding the instant disciplinary measure (hereinafter “instant disciplinary measure”) as indicated below.

Plaintiff

The reason for disciplinary action against the Plaintiff G Labor Relations Group, who was dismissed, planned and instigated the act of refusal of collective labor (hereinafter “instant strike”) that Plaintiff G Labor Relations Group proceeded from December 9, 2013 to December 31, 2013.

Article 6 (Duty of Good Faith), Article 8 (Prohibited Acts), Article 32 (Duty of Fidelity), Article 33 (Prohibition of Deserting Office), Article 37 (Duty of Deserting Office), Article 38 (Duty of Deserting Office), Article 52 (Disciplinary Grounds) 1 through 5 B of the Rules of Employment, the removal E removal from office who is removed from office No. 1 through 5 B of the Rules of Employment caused the instant strike.

(2) On December 4, 2013, at around 09:10, both S and S are present at the time of blocking the proceeding of a T event.