Corporate trends / Performance record
Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning “Expectation of Conversion to Regular Employment (National Theater Ability Verification Contract)” (Unfair Dismissal 164)
- Date2026/01/31 04:10
- Read 233
[Case Information]
This case is a decision in which the employer ultimately prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “expectation of conversion to regular employment (National Theater ability verification contract).”
Decision body: Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission 2025 Unfair Dismissal 9217 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
December 18, 2025 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of key issues: (a)
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, a member hired by the National Theater under an “ability verification contract” form expected to be converted to regular employment (employment stability contract) after working for a certain period. However, the employee was excluded from conversion following a review by the Personnel Committee and therefore filed an application for remedy for unfair dismissal. The employee argued the existence of an expectation of conversion to regular employment and the unfairness of the dismissal, relying on the content of past recruitment announcements and the practice of converting many members to regular employment. The employer, on the other hand, asserted the legitimacy of refusing conversion based on the Personnel Committee’s evaluation results and issues with the employee’s work attitude.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is “whether a member who has entered into an ability verification contract with the National Theater has an expectation of conversion to regular employment, and, even if such an expectation is recognized, whether the refusal to convert to regular employment based on the Personnel Committee’s evaluation is supported by reasonable grounds.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Findings
The panel in this case found that the expressions “ability verification contract” and “ability verification period” used in the National Theater’s recruitment announcements and employment contracts had the nature of a probationary period premised on subsequent regular employment, and that there existed a practice whereby many new members who had entered into ability verification contracts were converted, after two years, to employment stability contracts with no fixed term. In light of these circumstances, the panel held that the employee had an expectation of conversion to regular employment.
As to the dismissal in this case, the employer determined whether to convert the employee to regular employment through deliberation and resolution by the Personnel Committee. In that process, there were no circumstances identified in the minutes of deliberation and resolution that would cast doubt on their objectivity or fairness. The employee did not deny the basic facts regarding the work attitude that formed the basis of the Personnel Committee’s evaluation, and a significant number of managers, including the Artistic Director, expressed negative opinions regarding the employee’s conversion to regular employment. Taking these factors together,
even assuming that an expectation of conversion to regular employment is recognized in this case, the panel found that the reasons for refusing conversion based on the Personnel Committee’s evaluation were reasonable, and therefore held that the dismissal did not constitute unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
From the employee’s perspective, it is important to bear in mind that an expectation of conversion to regular employment can be formed through recruitment announcements, employment contracts, internal personnel regulations, and past practices of conversion to regular employment. However, even if such an expectation is recognized, if the evaluation criteria of the Personnel Committee exist in advance, there are no serious procedural or substantive defects in the actual evaluation process, and objective problems with the employee’s work attitude or performance are confirmed, refusal of conversion may be recognized as having just cause.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, when operating systems such as ability verification contracts, probationary/trial contracts, or screening systems for conversion to regular employment, it is necessary to clearly specify the criteria and procedures for conversion in recruitment announcements and employment contracts, and to manage actual practices so that they are consistent with those provisions. In addition, employers should internally organize the Personnel Committee’s evaluation items and methods, and document the evaluation results and their grounds. Doing so will make it significantly easier in practice to substantiate the reasonableness of a refusal to convert to regular employment before the Labor Relations Commission or the courts.
2. Matters Decided
(a) Case Overview and Procedural History
(a) Whether an expectation of conversion to regular employment is recognized
Given that the wording “ability verification contract” or “ability verification period” stipulated in the National Theater’s recruitment announcements and employment contracts presupposes work after conversion to regular employment, and that, in practice, the majority of new members who entered into ability verification contracts have, after two years, concluded employment stability contracts with no fixed term, the employee is recognized as having an expectation of conversion to regular employment.
(b) Whether there are reasonable grounds for refusing conversion to regular employment
No facts were identified that would cast doubt on the objectivity or fairness of the minutes of deliberation and resolution of the employer’s Personnel Committee, which determined whether the employee would be converted to regular employment. The employee did not deny the basic facts concerning the work attitude that formed the basis of the Personnel Committee’s evaluation, and managers including the Artistic Director expressed negative opinions regarding the employee’s conversion to regular employment. Taking these factors together, it was determined that there were reasonable grounds for refusing conversion to regular employment.
3. Summary of the Decision
(a) Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Findings
(a) Whether an expectation of conversion to regular employment is recognized
Given that the wording “ability verification contract” or “ability verification period” stipulated in the National Theater’s recruitment announcements and employment contracts presupposes work after conversion to regular employment, and that, in practice, the majority of new members who entered into ability verification contracts have, after two years, concluded employment stability contracts with no fixed term, the employee is recognized as having an expectation of conversion to regular employment.
(b) Whether there are reasonable grounds for refusing conversion to regular employment
No facts were identified that would cast doubt on the objectivity or fairness of the minutes of deliberation and resolution of the employer’s Personnel Committee, which determined whether the employee would be converted to regular employment. The employee did not deny the basic facts concerning the work attitude that formed the basis of the Personnel Committee’s evaluation, and managers including the Artistic Director expressed negative opinions regarding the employee’s conversion to regular employment. Taking these factors together, it was determined that there were reasonable grounds for refusing conversion to regular employment. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Extinction of Interest in Relief (Short-Term Fixed-Term Employment)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Failure to Satisfy Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expectation of conversion to regular employment (National Theater ability verification contract), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, personnel evaluation · poor performance, Labor Law Firm Law&, large labor law firm, Samseong-dong labor law firm, Samseong Station labor law firm, Gangnam labor law firm
※ This article is part of Labor Law Firm Law&’s “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series.
※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Extinction of Interest in Relief (Short-Term Fixed-Term Employment)’,” in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to expectation of conversion to regular employment (National Theater ability verification contract) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions Related to Expectation of Conversion to Regular Employment (National Theater Ability Verification Contract).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision in which the employer ultimately prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “expectation of conversion to regular employment (National Theater ability verification contract).”
Decision body: Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission 2025 Unfair Dismissal 9217 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
December 18, 2025 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of key issues: (a)
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, a member hired by the National Theater under an “ability verification contract” form expected to be converted to regular employment (employment stability contract) after working for a certain period. However, the employee was excluded from conversion following a review by the Personnel Committee and therefore filed an application for remedy for unfair dismissal. The employee argued the existence of an expectation of conversion to regular employment and the unfairness of the dismissal, relying on the content of past recruitment announcements and the practice of converting many members to regular employment. The employer, on the other hand, asserted the legitimacy of refusing conversion based on the Personnel Committee’s evaluation results and issues with the employee’s work attitude.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is “whether a member who has entered into an ability verification contract with the National Theater has an expectation of conversion to regular employment, and, even if such an expectation is recognized, whether the refusal to convert to regular employment based on the Personnel Committee’s evaluation is supported by reasonable grounds.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Findings
The panel in this case found that the expressions “ability verification contract” and “ability verification period” used in the National Theater’s recruitment announcements and employment contracts had the nature of a probationary period premised on subsequent regular employment, and that there existed a practice whereby many new members who had entered into ability verification contracts were converted, after two years, to employment stability contracts with no fixed term. In light of these circumstances, the panel held that the employee had an expectation of conversion to regular employment.
As to the dismissal in this case, the employer determined whether to convert the employee to regular employment through deliberation and resolution by the Personnel Committee. In that process, there were no circumstances identified in the minutes of deliberation and resolution that would cast doubt on their objectivity or fairness. The employee did not deny the basic facts regarding the work attitude that formed the basis of the Personnel Committee’s evaluation, and a significant number of managers, including the Artistic Director, expressed negative opinions regarding the employee’s conversion to regular employment. Taking these factors together,
even assuming that an expectation of conversion to regular employment is recognized in this case, the panel found that the reasons for refusing conversion based on the Personnel Committee’s evaluation were reasonable, and therefore held that the dismissal did not constitute unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
From the employee’s perspective, it is important to bear in mind that an expectation of conversion to regular employment can be formed through recruitment announcements, employment contracts, internal personnel regulations, and past practices of conversion to regular employment. However, even if such an expectation is recognized, if the evaluation criteria of the Personnel Committee exist in advance, there are no serious procedural or substantive defects in the actual evaluation process, and objective problems with the employee’s work attitude or performance are confirmed, refusal of conversion may be recognized as having just cause.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, when operating systems such as ability verification contracts, probationary/trial contracts, or screening systems for conversion to regular employment, it is necessary to clearly specify the criteria and procedures for conversion in recruitment announcements and employment contracts, and to manage actual practices so that they are consistent with those provisions. In addition, employers should internally organize the Personnel Committee’s evaluation items and methods, and document the evaluation results and their grounds. Doing so will make it significantly easier in practice to substantiate the reasonableness of a refusal to convert to regular employment before the Labor Relations Commission or the courts.
2. Matters Decided
(a) Case Overview and Procedural History
(a) Whether an expectation of conversion to regular employment is recognized
Given that the wording “ability verification contract” or “ability verification period” stipulated in the National Theater’s recruitment announcements and employment contracts presupposes work after conversion to regular employment, and that, in practice, the majority of new members who entered into ability verification contracts have, after two years, concluded employment stability contracts with no fixed term, the employee is recognized as having an expectation of conversion to regular employment.
(b) Whether there are reasonable grounds for refusing conversion to regular employment
No facts were identified that would cast doubt on the objectivity or fairness of the minutes of deliberation and resolution of the employer’s Personnel Committee, which determined whether the employee would be converted to regular employment. The employee did not deny the basic facts concerning the work attitude that formed the basis of the Personnel Committee’s evaluation, and managers including the Artistic Director expressed negative opinions regarding the employee’s conversion to regular employment. Taking these factors together, it was determined that there were reasonable grounds for refusing conversion to regular employment.
3. Summary of the Decision
(a) Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Findings
(a) Whether an expectation of conversion to regular employment is recognized
Given that the wording “ability verification contract” or “ability verification period” stipulated in the National Theater’s recruitment announcements and employment contracts presupposes work after conversion to regular employment, and that, in practice, the majority of new members who entered into ability verification contracts have, after two years, concluded employment stability contracts with no fixed term, the employee is recognized as having an expectation of conversion to regular employment.
(b) Whether there are reasonable grounds for refusing conversion to regular employment
No facts were identified that would cast doubt on the objectivity or fairness of the minutes of deliberation and resolution of the employer’s Personnel Committee, which determined whether the employee would be converted to regular employment. The employee did not deny the basic facts concerning the work attitude that formed the basis of the Personnel Committee’s evaluation, and managers including the Artistic Director expressed negative opinions regarding the employee’s conversion to regular employment. Taking these factors together, it was determined that there were reasonable grounds for refusing conversion to regular employment. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Extinction of Interest in Relief (Short-Term Fixed-Term Employment)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Failure to Satisfy Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expectation of conversion to regular employment (National Theater ability verification contract), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, personnel evaluation · poor performance, Labor Law Firm Law&, large labor law firm, Samseong-dong labor law firm, Samseong Station labor law firm, Gangnam labor law firm
※ This article is part of Labor Law Firm Law&’s “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series.
※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Extinction of Interest in Relief (Short-Term Fixed-Term Employment)’,” in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to expectation of conversion to regular employment (National Theater ability verification contract) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions Related to Expectation of Conversion to Regular Employment (National Theater Ability Verification Contract).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
