Corporate trends / Performance record
Unfair Dismissal Case Involving “Resignation upon Employer’s Recommendation (Severance Settlement)” (Unfair Dismissal 188)
- Date2026/02/09 04:04
- Read 249
[Case Information]
This case is a decision in which the initial ruling was upheld on the issue of “resignation upon employer’s recommendation (agreement on retirement consolation payment).”
Decision Body: Central Labor Relations Commission 2025Buhae1306 ○ ○ ○ Unfair Dismissal Relief Re‑examination Application
2025.12.15 · Case Result: Initial decision upheld
Key Issue Summary: (1) According to the letter of resignation that the employee personally drafted, signed, and submitted to the employer on February 6, 2025, the date of retirement was stated as February 6, 2025, the reason for retirement was stated as resignation upon employer’s recommendation, and in the “agreement and comments” section it was written: “Normal payment of one month’s salary for February 2025,” and “Including statutory severance pay, a separate retirement consolation payment of KRW 8,000,000 shall be paid by April 30, 2025, by agreement between the company and the employee.”
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this unfair dismissal case, the key issue before the Labor Relations Commission was whether the employee’s retirement constituted a dismissal by the employer, or a resignation upon employer’s recommendation / termination by mutual agreement by the employee. The employee personally drafted and submitted a resignation letter and agreed with the employer on specific conditions, including a retirement consolation payment of KRW 8,000,000. Thereafter, the employee filed an application for relief from unfair dismissal with the Labor Relations Commission, and the Central Labor Relations Commission upheld the initial decision (in favor of the employer).
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether, where an employee submits a resignation letter in the form of a resignation upon employer’s recommendation, specifying conditions such as a retirement consolation payment, this should be regarded as a genuine resignation, or instead as a dismissal in the form of a voluntary resignation (uiwon myeonjik) constituting unfair dismissal.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case noted that the employee personally drafted, signed, and submitted the resignation letter dated February 6, 2025, specifically stating the retirement date, the reason for retirement (resignation upon employer’s recommendation), and the timing of payment of salary and the KRW 8,000,000 retirement consolation payment; that the employee did not in fact report to work after the date of resignation; and that the employer paid all salary and consolation payments in accordance with the agreement.
In light of these facts, it was difficult to find that the employee had submitted the resignation letter only in form without any intention to resign, or that the employee’s declaration of intent was not genuine due to coercion or duress. In particular, considering that the amount of the retirement consolation payment was set at KRW 8,000,000 through discussions between the employer and the employee, the panel held that it was also difficult to conclude that the employee had no intention to resign.
Accordingly, the “dismissal” in this case was not a dismissal, but rather a termination of the employment relationship by “mutual agreement” through the employee’s submission of a resignation letter and the employer’s acceptance thereof, and therefore did not constitute unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Where an employee accepts a proposal for resignation upon employer’s recommendation, and the specific amount, retirement date, etc. are agreed and stated in the resignation letter and the agreed sums are actually received, it is very difficult to have unfair dismissal recognized later based solely on the assertion that “I did not truly intend to resign.” It is important to consider whether there are circumstances amounting to a “non‑genuine declaration of intent,” such as coercion by the employer, collective mass submission of resignation letters, or purely formal submission, and to secure in advance evidence to prove such circumstances (recordings, text messages, messenger logs, etc.).
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
When a company uses resignation upon employer’s recommendation or voluntary retirement as a means to avoid collective redundancies, it is necessary to clearly document in writing the employee’s voluntary intent and the specific terms of the agreement (retirement date, wages and severance pay, timing of payment of consolation money, etc.). However, if, in the course of restructuring or dealing with problematic employees, the company forces employees to submit resignation letters or pressures them to submit them en masse, such resignations may be deemed invalid as “non‑genuine declarations of intent” and be found to constitute unfair dismissal. Accordingly, employers should secure procedural fairness by keeping records of interviews, providing explanatory materials, granting a cooling‑off period, and so forth.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
(1) According to the resignation letter that the employee personally drafted, signed, and submitted to the employer on February 6, 2025, the retirement date was stated as February 6, 2025, the reason for retirement was stated as resignation upon employer’s recommendation, and in the “agreement and comments” section it was written: “Normal payment of one month’s salary for February 2025,” and “Including statutory severance pay, a separate retirement consolation payment of KRW 8,000,000 shall be paid by April 30, 2025, by agreement between the company and the employee.” The employer received the resignation letter, processed it for approval, and accepted it. (2) The employee did not report to work after the date of resignation, and the employer, in accordance with the agreement, paid the February 2025 salary on February 28, 2025, and also paid the KRW 8,000,000 consolation payment on April 29, 2025. (3) There are no confirmed circumstances indicating that the employee drafted the resignation letter without an intention to resign or that the declaration of intent to resign was made under coercion; moreover, in light of the fact that the amount of the retirement consolation payment was set at KRW 8,000,000 through discussions with the employer, it is also difficult to conclude that the employee had no intention to resign. Taking all of these circumstances together, the employment relationship between the parties is deemed to have been terminated by the employee’s submission of a resignation letter based on mutual agreement.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
(1) According to the resignation letter that the employee personally drafted, signed, and submitted to the employer on February 6, 2025, the retirement date was stated as February 6, 2025, the reason for retirement was stated as resignation upon employer’s recommendation, and in the “agreement and comments” section it was written: “Normal payment of one month’s salary for February 2025,” and “Including statutory severance pay, a separate retirement consolation payment of KRW 8,000,000 shall be paid by April 30, 2025, by agreement between the company and the employee.” The employer received the resignation letter, processed it for approval, and accepted it. (2) The employee did not report to work after the date of resignation, and the employer, in accordance with the agreement, paid the February 2025 salary on February 28, 2025, and also paid the KRW 8,000,000 consolation payment on April 29, 2025. (3) There are no confirmed circumstances indicating that the employee drafted the resignation letter without an intention to resign or that the declaration of intent to resign was made under coercion; moreover, in light of the fact that the amount of the retirement consolation payment was set at KRW 8,000,000 through discussions with the employer, it is also difficult to conclude that the employee had no intention to resign. Taking all of these circumstances together, the employment relationship between the parties is deemed to have been terminated by the employee’s submission of a resignation letter based on mutual agreement. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to ‘Non‑Formation of Employment Offer (Absence of Offer Letter)’” – Date of Decision: – Case Result: Initial decision upheld
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, resignation upon employer’s recommendation (severance settlement), 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, “Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to ‘Disciplinary Sanction Level (Security Screening · Induction Measures)’,” can be viewed in a new window.
※ A list of decisions relating to resignation upon employer’s recommendation (severance settlement) can be viewed under “List of Decisions Relating to Resignation upon Employer’s Recommendation (Severance Settlement).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision in which the initial ruling was upheld on the issue of “resignation upon employer’s recommendation (agreement on retirement consolation payment).”
Decision Body: Central Labor Relations Commission 2025Buhae1306 ○ ○ ○ Unfair Dismissal Relief Re‑examination Application
2025.12.15 · Case Result: Initial decision upheld
Key Issue Summary: (1) According to the letter of resignation that the employee personally drafted, signed, and submitted to the employer on February 6, 2025, the date of retirement was stated as February 6, 2025, the reason for retirement was stated as resignation upon employer’s recommendation, and in the “agreement and comments” section it was written: “Normal payment of one month’s salary for February 2025,” and “Including statutory severance pay, a separate retirement consolation payment of KRW 8,000,000 shall be paid by April 30, 2025, by agreement between the company and the employee.”
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this unfair dismissal case, the key issue before the Labor Relations Commission was whether the employee’s retirement constituted a dismissal by the employer, or a resignation upon employer’s recommendation / termination by mutual agreement by the employee. The employee personally drafted and submitted a resignation letter and agreed with the employer on specific conditions, including a retirement consolation payment of KRW 8,000,000. Thereafter, the employee filed an application for relief from unfair dismissal with the Labor Relations Commission, and the Central Labor Relations Commission upheld the initial decision (in favor of the employer).
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether, where an employee submits a resignation letter in the form of a resignation upon employer’s recommendation, specifying conditions such as a retirement consolation payment, this should be regarded as a genuine resignation, or instead as a dismissal in the form of a voluntary resignation (uiwon myeonjik) constituting unfair dismissal.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case noted that the employee personally drafted, signed, and submitted the resignation letter dated February 6, 2025, specifically stating the retirement date, the reason for retirement (resignation upon employer’s recommendation), and the timing of payment of salary and the KRW 8,000,000 retirement consolation payment; that the employee did not in fact report to work after the date of resignation; and that the employer paid all salary and consolation payments in accordance with the agreement.
In light of these facts, it was difficult to find that the employee had submitted the resignation letter only in form without any intention to resign, or that the employee’s declaration of intent was not genuine due to coercion or duress. In particular, considering that the amount of the retirement consolation payment was set at KRW 8,000,000 through discussions between the employer and the employee, the panel held that it was also difficult to conclude that the employee had no intention to resign.
Accordingly, the “dismissal” in this case was not a dismissal, but rather a termination of the employment relationship by “mutual agreement” through the employee’s submission of a resignation letter and the employer’s acceptance thereof, and therefore did not constitute unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Where an employee accepts a proposal for resignation upon employer’s recommendation, and the specific amount, retirement date, etc. are agreed and stated in the resignation letter and the agreed sums are actually received, it is very difficult to have unfair dismissal recognized later based solely on the assertion that “I did not truly intend to resign.” It is important to consider whether there are circumstances amounting to a “non‑genuine declaration of intent,” such as coercion by the employer, collective mass submission of resignation letters, or purely formal submission, and to secure in advance evidence to prove such circumstances (recordings, text messages, messenger logs, etc.).
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
When a company uses resignation upon employer’s recommendation or voluntary retirement as a means to avoid collective redundancies, it is necessary to clearly document in writing the employee’s voluntary intent and the specific terms of the agreement (retirement date, wages and severance pay, timing of payment of consolation money, etc.). However, if, in the course of restructuring or dealing with problematic employees, the company forces employees to submit resignation letters or pressures them to submit them en masse, such resignations may be deemed invalid as “non‑genuine declarations of intent” and be found to constitute unfair dismissal. Accordingly, employers should secure procedural fairness by keeping records of interviews, providing explanatory materials, granting a cooling‑off period, and so forth.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
(1) According to the resignation letter that the employee personally drafted, signed, and submitted to the employer on February 6, 2025, the retirement date was stated as February 6, 2025, the reason for retirement was stated as resignation upon employer’s recommendation, and in the “agreement and comments” section it was written: “Normal payment of one month’s salary for February 2025,” and “Including statutory severance pay, a separate retirement consolation payment of KRW 8,000,000 shall be paid by April 30, 2025, by agreement between the company and the employee.” The employer received the resignation letter, processed it for approval, and accepted it. (2) The employee did not report to work after the date of resignation, and the employer, in accordance with the agreement, paid the February 2025 salary on February 28, 2025, and also paid the KRW 8,000,000 consolation payment on April 29, 2025. (3) There are no confirmed circumstances indicating that the employee drafted the resignation letter without an intention to resign or that the declaration of intent to resign was made under coercion; moreover, in light of the fact that the amount of the retirement consolation payment was set at KRW 8,000,000 through discussions with the employer, it is also difficult to conclude that the employee had no intention to resign. Taking all of these circumstances together, the employment relationship between the parties is deemed to have been terminated by the employee’s submission of a resignation letter based on mutual agreement.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
(1) According to the resignation letter that the employee personally drafted, signed, and submitted to the employer on February 6, 2025, the retirement date was stated as February 6, 2025, the reason for retirement was stated as resignation upon employer’s recommendation, and in the “agreement and comments” section it was written: “Normal payment of one month’s salary for February 2025,” and “Including statutory severance pay, a separate retirement consolation payment of KRW 8,000,000 shall be paid by April 30, 2025, by agreement between the company and the employee.” The employer received the resignation letter, processed it for approval, and accepted it. (2) The employee did not report to work after the date of resignation, and the employer, in accordance with the agreement, paid the February 2025 salary on February 28, 2025, and also paid the KRW 8,000,000 consolation payment on April 29, 2025. (3) There are no confirmed circumstances indicating that the employee drafted the resignation letter without an intention to resign or that the declaration of intent to resign was made under coercion; moreover, in light of the fact that the amount of the retirement consolation payment was set at KRW 8,000,000 through discussions with the employer, it is also difficult to conclude that the employee had no intention to resign. Taking all of these circumstances together, the employment relationship between the parties is deemed to have been terminated by the employee’s submission of a resignation letter based on mutual agreement. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to ‘Non‑Formation of Employment Offer (Absence of Offer Letter)’” – Date of Decision: – Case Result: Initial decision upheld
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, resignation upon employer’s recommendation (severance settlement), 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, “Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to ‘Disciplinary Sanction Level (Security Screening · Induction Measures)’,” can be viewed in a new window.
※ A list of decisions relating to resignation upon employer’s recommendation (severance settlement) can be viewed under “List of Decisions Relating to Resignation upon Employer’s Recommendation (Severance Settlement).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
