1. The Defendant’s KRW 93,091,966 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from October 31, 2013 to February 9, 2017.

1. On April 4, 2012, the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff Company”) is a juristic person operating the automobile manufacturing business, etc. The Defendant is an ordinary member, who was elected as the sub-chairperson of the Korea Metal Trade Union affiliated with the National Democratic Trade Union Federation of Workers’ Unions (hereinafter referred to as “metallic Trade Union”) (hereinafter referred to as “non-regular sub-chapter”) which is composed of workers belonging to the Plaintiff Company’s Ulsan Factory Cooperation Business, and was working until October 15, 2013.

Plaintiff

1) The non-regular workers branch of the company has consistently demanded the Plaintiff company to change all of the workers belonging to the non-regular workers branch of the non-regular workers into the Plaintiff company’s regular workers. 2) In the case of dismissal dismissal and revocation of the decision for reexamination of unfair labor practices filed by the non-regular workers C against the chairman of the National Labor Relations Commission, the Supreme Court rendered a judgment of reversed and remanded to the effect that the Plaintiff company directly employs C on July 22, 2010, because the Plaintiff company was dispatched workers and used C for more than two years (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Du4367, hereinafter referred to as “the Supreme Court decision”), and after remanding according to the purport of the Supreme Court decision, the appellate court’s ruling was remanded on February 23, 2012, and became final and conclusive on the same day.

(Supreme Court Decision 201Du7076) From June 8, 2012 to June 22, 2012, the non-regular branch requested the Plaintiff to conduct collective bargaining with the Plaintiff Company by claiming the wage grade, illegal dispatch, and the proposal to change the form of work. The Plaintiff Company's non-regular branch decided to implement the requirements by holding a temporary meeting on June 25, 2012, which held the 38th temporary representative meeting to resolve the occurrence of the dispute, and constituted the dispute resolution committee. On July 1, 2012, the Plaintiff Company held the general meeting of members on July 22, 2012.