1. On May 23, 2017, the National Labor Relations Commission rendered unfair relief between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. On March 3, 2016, the Plaintiff, a corporation operating automobile repair business, etc., concluded a labor contract with the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “Supplementary Intervenor”) and granted the Intervenor the position of “factory head” to the Intervenor.

B. On October 17, 2016, an intervenor suffered a traffic accident while driving a motor vehicle owned by the Plaintiff and performing the outer work.

C. On November 7, 2016, the vice president of the Plaintiff stated that the Intervenor would terminate the employment contract with the Intervenor on the grounds that the Intervenor did not properly handle the pertinent accident while visiting the Intervenor as an office.

However, the agreement was not reached because the supplementary intervenor demanded to change the three-month period prior to the termination of the employment contract, and there was no consensus on the termination of the employment contract.

An assistant intervenor who goes to work on the next day and retires from work at around 18:10, before the end of the working hours, and then transferred the business to the vice president of the plaintiff, "at all times, to the representative director," and where there is a shortage in the business transfer system, the assistant intervenor shall be asked by telephone. In addition, the assistant intervenor did not work on November 9, 2016.

E. On November 9, 2016, the Intervenor made telephone conversations with the representative director of the Plaintiff.

In telephone conversations, the Intervenor requested the representative director of the Plaintiff to pay the amount of money in the name of retirement allowance or retirement allowance when he was unfairly dismissed. However, the representative director of the Plaintiff refused to pay the amount of retirement allowance or retirement allowance on the ground that the labor contract was terminated only upon the termination of the agreement, but the period of service of the Intervenor was not one year since the period of service of the Intervenor was not one year.

F. On November 21, 2016, the Intervenor asserts that the Plaintiff was unfairly dismissed by the Intervenor, and withdraws his dismissal by November 30, 2016.