1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that is established on February 17, 1988 and ordinarily employs approximately 10,000 workers and runs domestic and overseas air transport business.

An intervenor is employed by the plaintiff on July 1, 1997 and has served as C belonging to the B Team.

B. The Plaintiff notified the Intervenor on July 31, 2015, following a resolution of the Personnel Committee that “the Intervenor violated Article 5(1)2’s provision on his/her employees’ uniforms and appearance (hereinafter “the Intervenor”) so that he/she would not grow salt among the above provision,” and that he/she failed to comply with the direction of the Myeondo (hereinafter “the instant disciplinary cause”).

(hereinafter “instant disciplinary action”). C.

On October 29, 2015, the Intervenor asserted that the instant disciplinary action was unfair, and filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission, but the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Intervenor’s application for remedy on January 14, 2016.

On January 25, 2016, the intervenor appealed and applied for a review to the National Labor Relations Commission. On April 6, 2016, the National Labor Relations Commission deemed that a disciplinary decision was excessive, but accepted the intervenor’s application for a review.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant decision on reexamination”). 【No dispute exists, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.”

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

A. The grounds for the disciplinary action against the Plaintiff and the Intervenor 1) exist as follows. As such, the appearance provision of this case is lawful and effective. Thus, the Intervenor’s behavior that did not comply with the legitimate instruction of his superior constitutes grounds for the disciplinary action.

① From around 1988, the Plaintiff stipulated that the Plaintiff shall have a decent appearance to C. From around 1994, flight crew members are infected.