Corporate trends / Performance record
Non-Existence of Legitimate Expectation of Renewal (Temporary Workplace) in Unfair Dismissal Decisions (Unfair Dismissal 199)
- Date2026/02/13 04:15
- Read 253
[Case Information]
This case is a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “non-existence of legitimate expectation of renewal (temporary workplace).”
Adjudicating body: Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission 2025UnfairDismissal3300 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2025.12.12 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of key issues:
① The rules of employment merely specify that employees may be retired when “the term of the employment contract expires,” and contain no provision guaranteeing renewal after the expiration of the contract term. There was no basis or circumstance from which to infer that the employer had given the employee a legitimate expectation that the contract would be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions.
② In 2024, …
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, a fixed-term employee filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal, claiming that the failure to renew her contract upon its expiration constituted an unfair dismissal. The Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the application. The employee alleged that she had been subjected to workplace bullying by the building manager and others, and that her contract was not renewed as a result. However, the workplace bullying case had already been concluded separately with a finding of “no violation of law.” It was confirmed that the workplace was intended from the outset to be operated only on a temporary basis, and neither the rules of employment nor the employment contract contained any provision guaranteeing renewal of the employment contract.
Ⅱ. Issues
The issue in this case is whether an employee can be recognized as having a “legitimate expectation of renewal” of a fixed-term employment contract, and further, whether the expiration of the contract constitutes an unfair dismissal, in circumstances where there is no provision guaranteeing renewal in the rules of employment or the employment contract, and where there has been only a single renewal at a temporary workplace.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case noted that the rules of employment contain only a provision for “retirement upon expiration of the term of the employment contract,” and no provision whatsoever that guarantees renewal or provides for automatic renewal upon satisfaction of certain conditions; that the first contract is to be understood as a probationary contract and the second as the main contract, making it difficult to regard the situation as one of repeated or long-term renewals; that the workplace itself is premised on temporary operation and is not structured on the assumption of continuous employment; and that the workplace bullying case had already been concluded with a finding of “no violation of law,” making it difficult to recognize a causal link between that case and the contract’s expiration.
In light of the foregoing, the panel held that the fixed term of the employment contract could not be regarded as a mere formality, and that no legitimate expectation of renewal had been formed that would allow the employee to reasonably anticipate future renewals.
The panel therefore determined that the termination in this case should be regarded as an automatic retirement due to the expiration of the contract term, and that it did not constitute an unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
For a fixed-term employee to successfully claim unfair dismissal, it is not sufficient merely to assert that “there was one prior renewal” or that “the manager spoke as if I could continue working.” The key is whether a relationship of trust was formed—through the rules of employment, collective agreements, the contract, or established practice—that the contract would be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions. In particular, in temporary workplaces, project-based businesses, or structures where the risk of redundancy is ever-present, there is a high likelihood that the contract will, in principle, be deemed to terminate automatically upon expiration of the term. Accordingly, from the hiring stage, it is important to obtain clear written confirmation regarding the contract term and the possibility of renewal.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, when entering into a fixed-term employment contract, it is advisable to clearly stipulate in the rules of employment and the employment contract that the contract “automatically terminates upon expiration of the contract term,” and to exclude, as far as possible, any wording that could be misunderstood as setting renewal conditions or providing for automatic extension. If the workplace is temporary or the work is project-based, the temporary nature of the business should be consistently disclosed in the job posting, the employment contract, and during explanations to the employee. Even if a renewal is made, the employer should clearly record that “this contract is the final one and will terminate upon expiration of the term,” in order to reduce disputes over legitimate expectation of renewal and unfair dismissal.
This decision illustrates, in the context of unfair dismissal and redundancy, that the key criterion for distinguishing between dismissal and mere expiration of a fixed-term employment contract is whether a legitimate expectation of renewal has been formed. It is advisable to have the contract structure reviewed in advance by a specialized institution such as Labor Law Firm Law& to help prevent disputes.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
① The rules of employment merely specify that employees may be retired when “the term of the employment contract expires,” and contain no provision guaranteeing renewal after the expiration of the contract term. There was no basis or circumstance from which to infer that the employer had given the employee a legitimate expectation that the contract would be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions.
② Although there was one renewal following the initial employment contract in February 2024, the first contract is understood as a probationary contract and the second as the main contract, and this cannot be regarded as giving rise to a legitimate expectation of renewal.
③ It was confirmed that the workplace is operated on a temporary basis.
④ The employee alleged that she had been subjected to workplace bullying by the building manager and others, and that her contract was not renewed as a result. However, that case was concluded on 2025.6.20 with a finding of no violation of law, and there is no basis to view the expiration of the employment contract in this case as being related to workplace bullying. Accordingly, the employment relationship terminated upon expiration of the contract term.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
① The rules of employment merely specify that employees may be retired when “the term of the employment contract expires,” and contain no provision guaranteeing renewal after the expiration of the contract term. There was no basis or circumstance from which to infer that the employer had given the employee a legitimate expectation that the contract would be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions.
② Although there was one renewal following the initial employment contract in February 2024, the first contract is understood as a probationary contract and the second as the main contract, and this cannot be regarded as giving rise to a legitimate expectation of renewal.
③ It was confirmed that the workplace is operated on a temporary basis.
④ The employee alleged that she had been subjected to workplace bullying by the building manager and others, and that her contract was not renewed as a result. However, that case was concluded on 2025.6.20 with a finding of no violation of law, and there is no basis to view the expiration of the employment contract in this case as being related to workplace bullying. Accordingly, the employment relationship terminated upon expiration of the contract term. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision
- “Forced Resignation (Submission of Resignation Letter)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision
- “Non-Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision – Date of decision: – Case result: First-instance decision upheld
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, non-existence of legitimate expectation of renewal (temporary workplace), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, workplace bullying, 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 the “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Decision on Employer Standing (Separate Corporation Managing E-Cigarette Inventory),” in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to non-existence of legitimate expectation of renewal (temporary workplace) can be found under “List of Decisions Related to Non-Existence of Legitimate Expectation of Renewal (Temporary Workplace).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “non-existence of legitimate expectation of renewal (temporary workplace).”
Adjudicating body: Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission 2025UnfairDismissal3300 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2025.12.12 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of key issues:
① The rules of employment merely specify that employees may be retired when “the term of the employment contract expires,” and contain no provision guaranteeing renewal after the expiration of the contract term. There was no basis or circumstance from which to infer that the employer had given the employee a legitimate expectation that the contract would be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions.
② In 2024, …
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, a fixed-term employee filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal, claiming that the failure to renew her contract upon its expiration constituted an unfair dismissal. The Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the application. The employee alleged that she had been subjected to workplace bullying by the building manager and others, and that her contract was not renewed as a result. However, the workplace bullying case had already been concluded separately with a finding of “no violation of law.” It was confirmed that the workplace was intended from the outset to be operated only on a temporary basis, and neither the rules of employment nor the employment contract contained any provision guaranteeing renewal of the employment contract.
Ⅱ. Issues
The issue in this case is whether an employee can be recognized as having a “legitimate expectation of renewal” of a fixed-term employment contract, and further, whether the expiration of the contract constitutes an unfair dismissal, in circumstances where there is no provision guaranteeing renewal in the rules of employment or the employment contract, and where there has been only a single renewal at a temporary workplace.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case noted that the rules of employment contain only a provision for “retirement upon expiration of the term of the employment contract,” and no provision whatsoever that guarantees renewal or provides for automatic renewal upon satisfaction of certain conditions; that the first contract is to be understood as a probationary contract and the second as the main contract, making it difficult to regard the situation as one of repeated or long-term renewals; that the workplace itself is premised on temporary operation and is not structured on the assumption of continuous employment; and that the workplace bullying case had already been concluded with a finding of “no violation of law,” making it difficult to recognize a causal link between that case and the contract’s expiration.
In light of the foregoing, the panel held that the fixed term of the employment contract could not be regarded as a mere formality, and that no legitimate expectation of renewal had been formed that would allow the employee to reasonably anticipate future renewals.
The panel therefore determined that the termination in this case should be regarded as an automatic retirement due to the expiration of the contract term, and that it did not constitute an unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
For a fixed-term employee to successfully claim unfair dismissal, it is not sufficient merely to assert that “there was one prior renewal” or that “the manager spoke as if I could continue working.” The key is whether a relationship of trust was formed—through the rules of employment, collective agreements, the contract, or established practice—that the contract would be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions. In particular, in temporary workplaces, project-based businesses, or structures where the risk of redundancy is ever-present, there is a high likelihood that the contract will, in principle, be deemed to terminate automatically upon expiration of the term. Accordingly, from the hiring stage, it is important to obtain clear written confirmation regarding the contract term and the possibility of renewal.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, when entering into a fixed-term employment contract, it is advisable to clearly stipulate in the rules of employment and the employment contract that the contract “automatically terminates upon expiration of the contract term,” and to exclude, as far as possible, any wording that could be misunderstood as setting renewal conditions or providing for automatic extension. If the workplace is temporary or the work is project-based, the temporary nature of the business should be consistently disclosed in the job posting, the employment contract, and during explanations to the employee. Even if a renewal is made, the employer should clearly record that “this contract is the final one and will terminate upon expiration of the term,” in order to reduce disputes over legitimate expectation of renewal and unfair dismissal.
This decision illustrates, in the context of unfair dismissal and redundancy, that the key criterion for distinguishing between dismissal and mere expiration of a fixed-term employment contract is whether a legitimate expectation of renewal has been formed. It is advisable to have the contract structure reviewed in advance by a specialized institution such as Labor Law Firm Law& to help prevent disputes.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
① The rules of employment merely specify that employees may be retired when “the term of the employment contract expires,” and contain no provision guaranteeing renewal after the expiration of the contract term. There was no basis or circumstance from which to infer that the employer had given the employee a legitimate expectation that the contract would be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions.
② Although there was one renewal following the initial employment contract in February 2024, the first contract is understood as a probationary contract and the second as the main contract, and this cannot be regarded as giving rise to a legitimate expectation of renewal.
③ It was confirmed that the workplace is operated on a temporary basis.
④ The employee alleged that she had been subjected to workplace bullying by the building manager and others, and that her contract was not renewed as a result. However, that case was concluded on 2025.6.20 with a finding of no violation of law, and there is no basis to view the expiration of the employment contract in this case as being related to workplace bullying. Accordingly, the employment relationship terminated upon expiration of the contract term.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
① The rules of employment merely specify that employees may be retired when “the term of the employment contract expires,” and contain no provision guaranteeing renewal after the expiration of the contract term. There was no basis or circumstance from which to infer that the employer had given the employee a legitimate expectation that the contract would be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions.
② Although there was one renewal following the initial employment contract in February 2024, the first contract is understood as a probationary contract and the second as the main contract, and this cannot be regarded as giving rise to a legitimate expectation of renewal.
③ It was confirmed that the workplace is operated on a temporary basis.
④ The employee alleged that she had been subjected to workplace bullying by the building manager and others, and that her contract was not renewed as a result. However, that case was concluded on 2025.6.20 with a finding of no violation of law, and there is no basis to view the expiration of the employment contract in this case as being related to workplace bullying. Accordingly, the employment relationship terminated upon expiration of the contract term. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision
- “Forced Resignation (Submission of Resignation Letter)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision
- “Non-Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision – Date of decision: – Case result: First-instance decision upheld
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, non-existence of legitimate expectation of renewal (temporary workplace), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, workplace bullying, 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 the “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Decision on Employer Standing (Separate Corporation Managing E-Cigarette Inventory),” in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to non-existence of legitimate expectation of renewal (temporary workplace) can be found under “List of Decisions Related to Non-Existence of Legitimate Expectation of Renewal (Temporary Workplace).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
