1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. On October 4, 1994, the Plaintiff was enrolled in B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) and served as the head of the management support office from March 16, 2014 to March 20, 2017, and as the person in charge of managing D local newspaper sales offices from March 21, 2017.

B. On July 30, 2018, “The Plaintiff was a working-level officer in charge of preparing financial statements for the fiscal year 2016 at the time when he/she was in office as the head of the management support office.” However, in the evaluation of saleable securities that include the investment issues of subsidiaries E, the external auditor provided an inappropriate accounting by applying the general corporate accounting standards, B’s accounting rules, accounting practices, and other accounting standards (hereinafter “instant disciplinary ground”). In addition, the Plaintiff notified the former officer of erroneous accounting standards and practices (hereinafter “instant disciplinary ground”) and attempted to inflict damages arising from the said limited opinion (hereinafter “instant disciplinary ground”) and notified the Plaintiff of the disciplinary action for the period of salary reduction three months for the reason that the instant disciplinary action (hereinafter “instant salary reduction disposition”).

C. On October 23, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for remedy with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission by asserting that the instant salary reduction disposition is unreasonable.

On March 14, 2019, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission accepted the Plaintiff’s application for remedy on the ground that the grounds for disciplinary action No. 2 and 3 of the instant case were deemed to exist without any grounds for disciplinary action, and thereby, accepted the Plaintiff’s application for remedy on July 30, 2018. B revoked the instant salary reduction disposition made by the Plaintiff within 30 days from the date of receipt of the written judgment, and rendered a judgment that “the amount equivalent to the wages that the Plaintiff would have received if the Plaintiff had worked normally during the period of salary reduction” (hereinafter referred to as “the initial trial court of this case”).

B is dissatisfied with the first inquiry court of this case.