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.

The details and details of the decision on reexamination are corporations established on November 19, 2015 and engaged in logistics transportation business, etc. using approximately 113 full-time workers. The Plaintiff is a person who entered the Intervenor on January 4, 2016 and was engaged in the transportation and distribution of automobile parts.

On December 1, 2017, the Intervenor notified the Plaintiff that “the Plaintiff issued a retirement age on January 1, 2018”.

(hereinafter “instant notice of retirement.” On January 15, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for unfair dismissal with the Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission for remedy by asserting that the Intervenor’s notice of retirement was unjust.

On March 14, 2018, the Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for remedy on the ground that “the labor relationship between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor has expired due to the expiration of the contract term and the Plaintiff’s right of renewal of the contract is not recognized.”

On April 17, 2018, the Plaintiff appealed to this and filed an application for reexamination with the National Labor Relations Commission.

On June 7, 2018, the National Labor Relations Commission dismissed the plaintiff's application for reexamination on the same ground as the first inquiry tribunal.

(2) The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the instant decision on reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of this case (hereinafter “instant decision on reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of reexamination of this case”) . (hereinafter “instant ground for recognition”), and the Intervenor succeeded to employment from C.

The plaintiff worked for about 10 years at E2 factories in Bupyeong-si D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "D"), and the subcontractor has been changed several times, but each time has entered into an employment contract for one year of employment contract and has been exceptionally renewed every year.

In light of these practices, a commission employment contract concluded by the plaintiff and the intervenor is a contract which does not have a substantial period of time.