Corporate trends / Performance record
‘Formation of a Conditional Offer of Employment (Absence of Final Acceptance Notice)’ and Unfair Dismissal Relief Decision (Unfair Dismissal 122)
- Date2026/01/18 04:08
- Read 220
[Case Information]
This case is a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “formation of a conditional offer of employment (in the absence of a final acceptance notice).”
Decision body: Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission
Case No. 2025부해773 ○ ○ ○ Application for Relief from Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2025.11.14 · Outcome: Dismissed
Summary of key issue: For a conditional offer of employment to be formed, the employer’s intention to make such a conditional offer must be clearly expressed in an external and objective manner. In this case, the worker had not received any notice of a conditional offer of employment or final acceptance from the employer, no employment contract had been executed, and there were no other circumstances confirming the implied formation of an employment contract. Accordingly, it could not be viewed that a conditional offer of employment amounting to an employment contract had been formed between the parties.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, the worker claimed that a conditional offer of employment had been formed between the worker and the employer, and applied to the Labor Relations Commission for relief on the ground that the subsequent exclusion from hiring constituted an unfair dismissal. The Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission focused on whether a conditional offer of employment had been formed and, on that basis, whether an employment relationship existed and thus whether an application for relief from unfair dismissal was available.
In examining whether unfair dismissal had occurred, the Commission comprehensively reviewed the expressions of intent made during the recruitment process and the legal principles governing the formation of employment contracts, referring to established case law and academic theory on conditional offers of employment. This article outlines the Commission’s reasoning structure and, from the perspective of Labor Law Firm Law&, organizes practical points to prevent similar disputes.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether, “in the course of the employer’s recruitment process, in the absence of any separate notice of a conditional offer of employment or final acceptance and without execution of an employment contract, it can be deemed that an employment contract (conditional offer of employment) was impliedly formed.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
The decision panel in this case held that, for a conditional offer of employment to be formed, the employer’s intention to make such a conditional offer must be clearly expressed in an external and objective manner; that the worker had not received any notice of a conditional offer of employment or final acceptance from the employer; and that there was no evidence of execution of an employment contract or any other circumstances indicating the explicit or implicit formation of an employment contract.
Accordingly, the panel found it difficult to conclude that a conditional offer of employment amounting to an employment contract had been formed between the parties.
Because the underlying employment relationship itself could not be recognized, the panel determined that the employer’s action in this case could not be evaluated as a “dismissal” under the Labor Standards Act, and therefore could not constitute an unfair dismissal subject to an application for relief.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective)
From the worker’s perspective, passing a document screening stage, attending an interview, or receiving positive verbal feedback alone is generally insufficient to conclude that a conditional offer of employment has been formed. It is important to secure, in advance, materials that clearly and externally reveal the employer’s intention to hire—such as a notice of conditional offer or final acceptance (by email, text message, official letter, etc.)—as well as surrounding circumstances, in combination with an employment contract, work rules, or job postings, that support the conclusion that an employment contract has been formed.
If a hiring decision is reversed or onboarding falls through and the worker wishes to assert unfair dismissal, the worker must be able to prove that they were not merely an applicant, but held the status of a person with a conditional offer of employment or a party to an employment contract.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s/Company’s Perspective)
From the company’s perspective, it is necessary to clearly distinguish the wording used at each stage—job posting, document screening/interview pass notices, and final acceptance (conditional offer) notices—so that the timing of the formation of the employment contract does not become unclear. In particular, when issuing a final acceptance or conditional offer notice, the company should specify the start date of employment, required documents, and grounds for possible termination of the offer (e.g., failure to graduate, failure to meet qualification requirements), so that, even where a conditional offer of employment is formed, the scope of any reserved right to terminate the offer is clearly understood and does not give rise to disputes.
In addition, if ambiguous expressions such as “You’re almost in” or “Once you come, let’s work together” are used loosely during the recruitment process, workers may misunderstand these as confirmation of hiring, leading to disputes. Accordingly, until an official notice is issued, the company should clearly inform candidates that the hiring decision has not yet been finalized.
Finally, unlike disputes involving unfair dismissal or redundancy dismissals, disputes at the recruitment stage turn on whether an employment contract has been formed. Employers should therefore provide basic training to HR managers and recruitment staff on the legal principles governing conditional offers of employment and the structure of declarations of intent (offer and acceptance, invitation to treat, etc.), so as to avoid unfavorable decisions before the Labor Relations Commission or the courts.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
For a conditional offer of employment to be formed, the employer’s intention to make such a conditional offer must be clearly expressed in an external and objective manner. In this case, the worker had not received any notice of a conditional offer of employment or final acceptance from the employer, no employment contract had been executed, and there were no other circumstances confirming the implied formation of an employment contract. Accordingly, it could not be viewed that a conditional offer of employment amounting to an employment contract had been formed between the parties.
3. Summary of Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
For a conditional offer of employment to be formed, the employer’s intention to make such a conditional offer must be clearly expressed in an external and objective manner. In this case, the worker had not received any notice of a conditional offer of employment or final acceptance from the employer, no employment contract had been executed, and there were no other circumstances confirming the implied formation of an employment contract. Accordingly, it could not be viewed that a conditional offer of employment amounting to an employment contract had been formed between the parties. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “‘Non-Formation of Conditional Offer of Employment (Absence of Offer Letter)’ and Unfair Dismissal Relief Decision” – Decision date: - · Case No.: First-instance decision upheld
- “‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark Made by Telephone)’ and Unfair Dismissal Relief Decision”
- “‘Let’s Give Written Notice (Defective Dismissal Notice)’ and Unfair Dismissal Relief Decision”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, formation of conditional offer of employment (absence of final acceptance notice), others, 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.
※ The previous article, “‘Let’s Give Written Notice (Defective Dismissal Notice)’ and Unfair Dismissal Relief Decision,” can be viewed in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to formation of a conditional offer of employment (absence of final acceptance notice) can be found under “List of Decisions Related to Formation of Conditional Offer of Employment (Absence of Final Acceptance Notice).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “formation of a conditional offer of employment (in the absence of a final acceptance notice).”
Decision body: Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission
Case No. 2025부해773 ○ ○ ○ Application for Relief from Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2025.11.14 · Outcome: Dismissed
Summary of key issue: For a conditional offer of employment to be formed, the employer’s intention to make such a conditional offer must be clearly expressed in an external and objective manner. In this case, the worker had not received any notice of a conditional offer of employment or final acceptance from the employer, no employment contract had been executed, and there were no other circumstances confirming the implied formation of an employment contract. Accordingly, it could not be viewed that a conditional offer of employment amounting to an employment contract had been formed between the parties.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, the worker claimed that a conditional offer of employment had been formed between the worker and the employer, and applied to the Labor Relations Commission for relief on the ground that the subsequent exclusion from hiring constituted an unfair dismissal. The Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission focused on whether a conditional offer of employment had been formed and, on that basis, whether an employment relationship existed and thus whether an application for relief from unfair dismissal was available.
In examining whether unfair dismissal had occurred, the Commission comprehensively reviewed the expressions of intent made during the recruitment process and the legal principles governing the formation of employment contracts, referring to established case law and academic theory on conditional offers of employment. This article outlines the Commission’s reasoning structure and, from the perspective of Labor Law Firm Law&, organizes practical points to prevent similar disputes.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether, “in the course of the employer’s recruitment process, in the absence of any separate notice of a conditional offer of employment or final acceptance and without execution of an employment contract, it can be deemed that an employment contract (conditional offer of employment) was impliedly formed.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
The decision panel in this case held that, for a conditional offer of employment to be formed, the employer’s intention to make such a conditional offer must be clearly expressed in an external and objective manner; that the worker had not received any notice of a conditional offer of employment or final acceptance from the employer; and that there was no evidence of execution of an employment contract or any other circumstances indicating the explicit or implicit formation of an employment contract.
Accordingly, the panel found it difficult to conclude that a conditional offer of employment amounting to an employment contract had been formed between the parties.
Because the underlying employment relationship itself could not be recognized, the panel determined that the employer’s action in this case could not be evaluated as a “dismissal” under the Labor Standards Act, and therefore could not constitute an unfair dismissal subject to an application for relief.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective)
From the worker’s perspective, passing a document screening stage, attending an interview, or receiving positive verbal feedback alone is generally insufficient to conclude that a conditional offer of employment has been formed. It is important to secure, in advance, materials that clearly and externally reveal the employer’s intention to hire—such as a notice of conditional offer or final acceptance (by email, text message, official letter, etc.)—as well as surrounding circumstances, in combination with an employment contract, work rules, or job postings, that support the conclusion that an employment contract has been formed.
If a hiring decision is reversed or onboarding falls through and the worker wishes to assert unfair dismissal, the worker must be able to prove that they were not merely an applicant, but held the status of a person with a conditional offer of employment or a party to an employment contract.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s/Company’s Perspective)
From the company’s perspective, it is necessary to clearly distinguish the wording used at each stage—job posting, document screening/interview pass notices, and final acceptance (conditional offer) notices—so that the timing of the formation of the employment contract does not become unclear. In particular, when issuing a final acceptance or conditional offer notice, the company should specify the start date of employment, required documents, and grounds for possible termination of the offer (e.g., failure to graduate, failure to meet qualification requirements), so that, even where a conditional offer of employment is formed, the scope of any reserved right to terminate the offer is clearly understood and does not give rise to disputes.
In addition, if ambiguous expressions such as “You’re almost in” or “Once you come, let’s work together” are used loosely during the recruitment process, workers may misunderstand these as confirmation of hiring, leading to disputes. Accordingly, until an official notice is issued, the company should clearly inform candidates that the hiring decision has not yet been finalized.
Finally, unlike disputes involving unfair dismissal or redundancy dismissals, disputes at the recruitment stage turn on whether an employment contract has been formed. Employers should therefore provide basic training to HR managers and recruitment staff on the legal principles governing conditional offers of employment and the structure of declarations of intent (offer and acceptance, invitation to treat, etc.), so as to avoid unfavorable decisions before the Labor Relations Commission or the courts.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
For a conditional offer of employment to be formed, the employer’s intention to make such a conditional offer must be clearly expressed in an external and objective manner. In this case, the worker had not received any notice of a conditional offer of employment or final acceptance from the employer, no employment contract had been executed, and there were no other circumstances confirming the implied formation of an employment contract. Accordingly, it could not be viewed that a conditional offer of employment amounting to an employment contract had been formed between the parties.
3. Summary of Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
For a conditional offer of employment to be formed, the employer’s intention to make such a conditional offer must be clearly expressed in an external and objective manner. In this case, the worker had not received any notice of a conditional offer of employment or final acceptance from the employer, no employment contract had been executed, and there were no other circumstances confirming the implied formation of an employment contract. Accordingly, it could not be viewed that a conditional offer of employment amounting to an employment contract had been formed between the parties. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “‘Non-Formation of Conditional Offer of Employment (Absence of Offer Letter)’ and Unfair Dismissal Relief Decision” – Decision date: - · Case No.: First-instance decision upheld
- “‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark Made by Telephone)’ and Unfair Dismissal Relief Decision”
- “‘Let’s Give Written Notice (Defective Dismissal Notice)’ and Unfair Dismissal Relief Decision”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, formation of conditional offer of employment (absence of final acceptance notice), others, 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.
※ The previous article, “‘Let’s Give Written Notice (Defective Dismissal Notice)’ and Unfair Dismissal Relief Decision,” can be viewed in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to formation of a conditional offer of employment (absence of final acceptance notice) can be found under “List of Decisions Related to Formation of Conditional Offer of Employment (Absence of Final Acceptance Notice).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
