Corporate trends / Performance record
Unfair Dismissal Case on “Legitimacy of Job Transfer (Failure to Submit Graduation Certificate)” (Unfair Dismissal 309)
- Date2026/03/23 04:08
- Read 213
[Case Information]
This case is a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “legitimacy of job transfer (failure to submit graduation certificate).”
Decision body: Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission 2025 Unfair Dismissal 9594 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026.01.09 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of key issues:
A. Existence of business necessity
The employer requested the employee to submit a university graduation certificate and transcript on 29 August 2025 and, thereafter, repeatedly demanded submission of the original graduation certificate. The employee has still not provided it. In light of these circumstances, the job transfer was found to be supported by business necessity.
B. Degree of disadvantage in living conditions
It was difficult to find that the disadvantage to the employee’s living conditions went significantly beyond the level ordinarily to be endured.
C. [implicit in original summary; omitted here as in source]
1. Legal Implications
In this unfair dismissal case, the Labor Relations Commission focused its review on the legitimacy of the job transfer order. The central issue was how the Commission would assess business necessity for the transfer, the degree of disadvantage in the employee’s living conditions, and compliance with consultation procedures.
Labor Law Firm Law& provides practical advice to both employees and companies in similar disputes over transfer and reassignment, and this decision can serve as an important reference for understanding the legal principles governing personnel transfers, which arise as frequently as collective redundancies.
Ⅰ. Case Overview
The employer repeatedly requested that the employee submit a university graduation certificate and transcript, in particular the original graduation certificate. When the employee failed to comply, the employer issued a personnel order for a job transfer (change in duties and placement). The employee filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission, arguing that the transfer in substance amounted to unfair dismissal. On 9 January 2026, however, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the application for remedy.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether a personnel order for job transfer issued to an employee who, after joining the company, fails to submit the original graduation certificate relating to academic background constitutes an unlawful measure equivalent to unfair dismissal, on the grounds that there is no business necessity, that the disadvantage in living conditions is excessive, and that no consultation procedure was followed.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel held that business necessity for the job transfer was established, noting that the employee has still not submitted the original graduation certificate despite the employer’s request on 29 August 2025 for submission of the graduation certificate and transcript and subsequent repeated demands, and that, as a result, the basic data underlying personnel and hiring decisions were incomplete, creating a need for changes in personnel placement from the standpoint of workforce management.
With respect to the disadvantage in the employee’s living conditions arising from the transfer, the panel found that, although there might be inconvenience due to changes in duties and workplace, it was difficult to conclude that such disadvantage significantly exceeded the level that an employee is ordinarily expected to endure.
The panel further held that the mere fact that the employer did not obtain the employee’s consent or go through a separate consultation procedure in the course of issuing the personnel order does not, by itself, allow one to conclude that the order violates Article 23(1) of the Labor Standards Act as an abuse of rights or a breach of the principle of good faith. Accordingly, the job transfer order in this case was deemed to fall within the scope of a legitimate exercise of managerial prerogative in personnel matters.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Employees should be aware that academic and career verification documents requested by the employer at the time of hiring or thereafter—particularly graduation certificates and career certificates—are not mere formalities but materials that directly affect personnel decisions, placement, and the formation of a relationship of trust. If submission is delayed or refused without just cause, business necessity may be recognized for the employer to take personnel measures such as transfer or reassignment. If the resulting transfer does not go beyond the ordinary range of disadvantage in living conditions, it will be difficult to obtain relief on the basis of unfair dismissal.
In addition, whether a transfer or reassignment is sufficiently unreasonable to be considered unlawful cannot be established merely by asserting “I did not agree.” It is necessary to allege and prove, with objective evidence, what specific disadvantages in living conditions have arisen and whether those disadvantages significantly exceed the level ordinarily to be endured.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, in order to obtain a finding that a transfer or reassignment order falls within the scope of legitimate managerial prerogative in personnel matters, it is necessary, first, to document internally the objective necessity for changes in personnel placement—for example, what risks and inconveniences are actually caused by incomplete personnel data such as failure to submit a graduation certificate. Second, the employer should review in advance the degree of disadvantage in the employee’s living conditions resulting from the transfer (commuting distance, difficulty of duties, changes in wages and allowances, etc.) and design the transfer so that it does not exceed the range ordinarily to be endured.
It is also desirable to specify in collective agreements and work rules the standards, procedures, and methods of consultation for transfers and reassignments, thereby establishing a predictable personnel system in advance. Even in the absence of separate consultation provisions, it is advisable, where possible, to secure procedural legitimacy required under the principle of good faith by providing prior explanations and hearing the employee’s opinions.
This decision reaffirms the Supreme Court’s legal principle that, when assessing the legitimacy of transfers and reassignments, the Labor Relations Commission comprehensively weighs and balances (i) objective business necessity, (ii) the degree of disadvantage in living conditions, and (iii) the procedures of consultation and explanation. In similar cases, both employees and companies should organize facts and evidence around these three pillars, as they are the key points for preventing and responding to disputes.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case overview and procedural history
A. Existence of business necessity
The employer requested the employee to submit a university graduation certificate and transcript on 29 August 2025 and, thereafter, repeatedly demanded submission of the original graduation certificate. In light of the fact that the employee has still not provided it, business necessity for the job transfer exists.
B. Degree of disadvantage in living conditions
It is difficult to find that the disadvantage to the employee’s living conditions went significantly beyond the level ordinarily to be endured.
C. Compliance with consultation procedures required under the principle of good faith
The mere fact that the employer did not obtain the employee’s consent or go through a consultation procedure does not render the job transfer order automatically null and void.
3. Summary of Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s reasoning
A. Existence of business necessity
The employer requested the employee to submit a university graduation certificate and transcript on 29 August 2025 and, thereafter, repeatedly demanded submission of the original graduation certificate. In light of the fact that the employee has still not provided it, business necessity for the job transfer exists.
B. Degree of disadvantage in living conditions
It is difficult to find that the disadvantage to the employee’s living conditions went significantly beyond the level ordinarily to be endured.
C. Compliance with consultation procedures required under the principle of good faith
The mere fact that the employer did not obtain the employee’s consent or go through a consultation procedure does not render the job transfer order automatically null and void. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark Made by Telephone)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Employee Status and Application of Retirement Age (Employees Continuing to Work After Retirement Age)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, legitimacy of job transfer (failure to submit graduation certificate), transfer and reassignment, lawfulness of exercise of managerial prerogative in personnel matters, Labor Law Firm Law&, large labor law firm, labor law firm in Samseong-dong, labor law firm near Samseong Station, labor law firm in Gangnam
※ This article is one of the “Unfair Dismissal Decision” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Employee Status and Application of Retirement Age (Employees Continuing to Work After Retirement Age)’,” in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to legitimacy of job transfer (failure to submit graduation certificate) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions Related to Legitimacy of Job Transfer (Failure to Submit Graduation Certificate).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “legitimacy of job transfer (failure to submit graduation certificate).”
Decision body: Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission 2025 Unfair Dismissal 9594 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026.01.09 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of key issues:
A. Existence of business necessity
The employer requested the employee to submit a university graduation certificate and transcript on 29 August 2025 and, thereafter, repeatedly demanded submission of the original graduation certificate. The employee has still not provided it. In light of these circumstances, the job transfer was found to be supported by business necessity.
B. Degree of disadvantage in living conditions
It was difficult to find that the disadvantage to the employee’s living conditions went significantly beyond the level ordinarily to be endured.
C. [implicit in original summary; omitted here as in source]
1. Legal Implications
In this unfair dismissal case, the Labor Relations Commission focused its review on the legitimacy of the job transfer order. The central issue was how the Commission would assess business necessity for the transfer, the degree of disadvantage in the employee’s living conditions, and compliance with consultation procedures.
Labor Law Firm Law& provides practical advice to both employees and companies in similar disputes over transfer and reassignment, and this decision can serve as an important reference for understanding the legal principles governing personnel transfers, which arise as frequently as collective redundancies.
Ⅰ. Case Overview
The employer repeatedly requested that the employee submit a university graduation certificate and transcript, in particular the original graduation certificate. When the employee failed to comply, the employer issued a personnel order for a job transfer (change in duties and placement). The employee filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission, arguing that the transfer in substance amounted to unfair dismissal. On 9 January 2026, however, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the application for remedy.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether a personnel order for job transfer issued to an employee who, after joining the company, fails to submit the original graduation certificate relating to academic background constitutes an unlawful measure equivalent to unfair dismissal, on the grounds that there is no business necessity, that the disadvantage in living conditions is excessive, and that no consultation procedure was followed.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel held that business necessity for the job transfer was established, noting that the employee has still not submitted the original graduation certificate despite the employer’s request on 29 August 2025 for submission of the graduation certificate and transcript and subsequent repeated demands, and that, as a result, the basic data underlying personnel and hiring decisions were incomplete, creating a need for changes in personnel placement from the standpoint of workforce management.
With respect to the disadvantage in the employee’s living conditions arising from the transfer, the panel found that, although there might be inconvenience due to changes in duties and workplace, it was difficult to conclude that such disadvantage significantly exceeded the level that an employee is ordinarily expected to endure.
The panel further held that the mere fact that the employer did not obtain the employee’s consent or go through a separate consultation procedure in the course of issuing the personnel order does not, by itself, allow one to conclude that the order violates Article 23(1) of the Labor Standards Act as an abuse of rights or a breach of the principle of good faith. Accordingly, the job transfer order in this case was deemed to fall within the scope of a legitimate exercise of managerial prerogative in personnel matters.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Employees should be aware that academic and career verification documents requested by the employer at the time of hiring or thereafter—particularly graduation certificates and career certificates—are not mere formalities but materials that directly affect personnel decisions, placement, and the formation of a relationship of trust. If submission is delayed or refused without just cause, business necessity may be recognized for the employer to take personnel measures such as transfer or reassignment. If the resulting transfer does not go beyond the ordinary range of disadvantage in living conditions, it will be difficult to obtain relief on the basis of unfair dismissal.
In addition, whether a transfer or reassignment is sufficiently unreasonable to be considered unlawful cannot be established merely by asserting “I did not agree.” It is necessary to allege and prove, with objective evidence, what specific disadvantages in living conditions have arisen and whether those disadvantages significantly exceed the level ordinarily to be endured.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, in order to obtain a finding that a transfer or reassignment order falls within the scope of legitimate managerial prerogative in personnel matters, it is necessary, first, to document internally the objective necessity for changes in personnel placement—for example, what risks and inconveniences are actually caused by incomplete personnel data such as failure to submit a graduation certificate. Second, the employer should review in advance the degree of disadvantage in the employee’s living conditions resulting from the transfer (commuting distance, difficulty of duties, changes in wages and allowances, etc.) and design the transfer so that it does not exceed the range ordinarily to be endured.
It is also desirable to specify in collective agreements and work rules the standards, procedures, and methods of consultation for transfers and reassignments, thereby establishing a predictable personnel system in advance. Even in the absence of separate consultation provisions, it is advisable, where possible, to secure procedural legitimacy required under the principle of good faith by providing prior explanations and hearing the employee’s opinions.
This decision reaffirms the Supreme Court’s legal principle that, when assessing the legitimacy of transfers and reassignments, the Labor Relations Commission comprehensively weighs and balances (i) objective business necessity, (ii) the degree of disadvantage in living conditions, and (iii) the procedures of consultation and explanation. In similar cases, both employees and companies should organize facts and evidence around these three pillars, as they are the key points for preventing and responding to disputes.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case overview and procedural history
A. Existence of business necessity
The employer requested the employee to submit a university graduation certificate and transcript on 29 August 2025 and, thereafter, repeatedly demanded submission of the original graduation certificate. In light of the fact that the employee has still not provided it, business necessity for the job transfer exists.
B. Degree of disadvantage in living conditions
It is difficult to find that the disadvantage to the employee’s living conditions went significantly beyond the level ordinarily to be endured.
C. Compliance with consultation procedures required under the principle of good faith
The mere fact that the employer did not obtain the employee’s consent or go through a consultation procedure does not render the job transfer order automatically null and void.
3. Summary of Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s reasoning
A. Existence of business necessity
The employer requested the employee to submit a university graduation certificate and transcript on 29 August 2025 and, thereafter, repeatedly demanded submission of the original graduation certificate. In light of the fact that the employee has still not provided it, business necessity for the job transfer exists.
B. Degree of disadvantage in living conditions
It is difficult to find that the disadvantage to the employee’s living conditions went significantly beyond the level ordinarily to be endured.
C. Compliance with consultation procedures required under the principle of good faith
The mere fact that the employer did not obtain the employee’s consent or go through a consultation procedure does not render the job transfer order automatically null and void. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark Made by Telephone)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Employee Status and Application of Retirement Age (Employees Continuing to Work After Retirement Age)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, legitimacy of job transfer (failure to submit graduation certificate), transfer and reassignment, lawfulness of exercise of managerial prerogative in personnel matters, Labor Law Firm Law&, large labor law firm, labor law firm in Samseong-dong, labor law firm near Samseong Station, labor law firm in Gangnam
※ This article is one of the “Unfair Dismissal Decision” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Employee Status and Application of Retirement Age (Employees Continuing to Work After Retirement Age)’,” in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to legitimacy of job transfer (failure to submit graduation certificate) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions Related to Legitimacy of Job Transfer (Failure to Submit Graduation Certificate).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
