1. On November 16, 2012, the National Labor Relations Commission between the Plaintiffs and the Intervenor joining the Defendant, the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation, and the Bsannam Hospital.

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. The Plaintiff’s National Health and Medical Service Industry Workers’ Union is an industrial trade union that establishes B Hospital Branch (hereinafter “instant Branch”) in the Industrial Complex B (hereinafter “instant Hospital”), and the Plaintiff A is a Class 5 employee of the nursing staff working in the instant hospital from September 14, 1990, who was employed in the instant hospital from January 1, 2007. The Defendant joining the Defendant is a corporation established under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.

B. A subordinate organization of the instant hospital is comprised of a deputy medical care officer, a deputy administrative officer, and a deputy medical care officer. On February 29, 2012, while serving in the nursing department, which is a department established under the jurisdiction of the deputy medical care officer, the Plaintiff A was ordered on March 5, 2012 by the head of the instant hospital to serve in the medical care support department.

(C) On March 5, 2012, the head of the instant hospital ordered the Plaintiff A to work on March 5, 2012 (hereinafter “instant relocation”).

The Plaintiffs filed an application for remedy against the Intervenor and the instant hospital to the Gangwon Regional Labor Relations Commission on July 17, 2012, which concluded that the instant conversion constitutes unfair placement conversion, disadvantageous treatment, control and intervention, and that the instant conversion constitutes unfair labor practices. The Gangwon Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiffs’ application for remedy against the instant hospital on the ground that the instant hospital was not the subject of legal independent rights and obligations, and dismissed the application for remedy against the Intervenor on the ground that the instant conversion was not the subject of legal independent rights and obligations, and ordered remedy against the Intervenor on the ground that the instant conversion was an unfair placement conversion, and dismissed the rest of the Plaintiffs’ request for remedy.

The Plaintiffs and the Intervenor filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission on November 16, 2012, and the National Labor Relations Commission revoked the first instance remedy order in the case of the application for unfair placement conversion and unfair labor practices filed by the National Labor Relations Commission and dismissed both the Plaintiffs’ application for remedy and reexamination.

[Ground of recognition] There is no dispute.