Corporate trends / Performance record
Unfair Dismissal Decision on “Expectation of Renewal (Apartment Cleaning Services)” (Unfair Dismissal 219)
- Date2026/02/20 04:09
- Read 235
[Case Information]
This case is a decision that concluded with the first-instance decision being upheld on the issue of “expectation of renewal (apartment cleaning services).”
Decision Committee: Central Labor Relations Commission 2025Buhae1284 ○ ○ ○ Application for Re-examination for Remedy of Unfair Dismissal
2025.12.10 · Case Result: First-instance decision upheld
Summary of key issues:
A. Existence of an expectation of renewal of the employment contract
(1) The cleaning service contract between the employer and the apartment complex has continued up to the present;
(2) The employer has established internal evaluation criteria and procedures regarding renewal of fixed-term workers’ employment contracts and has been deciding on renewal based on those criteria, and refused to renew this worker’s contract when the worker’s performance evaluation score fell below the threshold score (70 points) for renewal;
In light of the above circumstances as a whole, it was considered that a relationship of trust had been formed between the parties to the employment contract to the effect that the contract would be renewed if certain conditions were met…
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
This unfair dismissal case concerns a fixed-term worker employed at an apartment complex as a cleaning service worker who applied to the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal after the employer refused to renew the contract upon its expiration. The cleaning service contract between the employer and the apartment complex remained in force, and the employer had been deciding on renewals based on internal personnel evaluation criteria, but refused to renew only this worker’s contract. This became the central issue. The Central Labor Relations Commission upheld the first-instance decision (no unfair dismissal).
Ⅱ. Issues in Dispute
The issue in this case is whether, in circumstances where a fixed-term apartment cleaning service worker has an expectation of renewal of the employment contract, there exists a reasonable ground for refusing renewal based on the results of a personnel evaluation. Furthermore, even where an expectation of renewal is recognized, the question arose whether a refusal to renew constitutes unfair dismissal if the evaluation criteria and their operation, as established by the employer, fall within an objective and fair range.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The decision panel in this case noted that the cleaning service contract between the employer and the apartment complex was ongoing, that the employer had been deciding on the renewal of fixed-term workers based on a concrete standard and procedure—namely, a score of 70 points or higher—and that the worker in question received a score of 66 points, below the threshold, in the personnel evaluation.
Considering the content of the employment contract and the established practice of renewal, the panel found that the worker did have an expectation of renewal. However, it also found that there had been multiple counseling sessions due to the worker’s repeated failure to comply with work instructions, that the apartment management office director had requested the worker’s replacement, and that these circumstances had been reflected in the evaluation. In light of this, the panel concluded that it was difficult to regard the personnel evaluation as markedly arbitrary or lacking in fairness and objectivity.
The panel held that, under the legal principle that even where an expectation of renewal is recognized, a refusal to renew cannot be deemed unfair dismissal if there is a reasonable ground for such refusal, the employer’s refusal to renew the contract fell within a socially acceptable and reasonable range. Accordingly, the refusal was not found to be unfair.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective)
From the worker’s perspective, it is important to understand that an expectation of renewal may be recognized where there are concrete provisions in the employment contract, rules of employment, or internal personnel evaluation criteria stating, for example, that “the contract will be renewed if a certain score is achieved.” However, even if an expectation of renewal is recognized, a refusal to renew may be deemed justified if repeated failure to follow work instructions or issues with work attitude are objectively reflected in the personnel evaluation. It is therefore crucial to keep records on an ongoing basis, such as notes of counseling sessions, evidence of compliance or non-compliance with instructions, and indications of unfairness in the evaluation process. When disputing the matter before the Labor Relations Commission or the courts, one must not simply challenge the low score itself, but must specifically prove, with supporting materials, that the evaluation items and their application were discriminatory or arbitrary.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, the key is to clearly set out in writing the criteria and procedures for renewing fixed-term workers and to apply those criteria consistently in practice. In a structure where an expectation of renewal is recognized, as in this case, if the grounds for refusing renewal relate to the worker’s responsibility—such as work attitude or failure to follow work instructions—the employer must retain objective records of the circumstances, including the background, content of counseling sessions, requests for correction, and whether there was improvement (e.g. counseling notes, written instructions, photographs). The employer should also check in advance whether the linkage between personnel evaluation scores and renewal decisions is applied in the same way to other workers, and whether the evaluation items are vague or targeted at a specific individual.
Finally, where a fixed-term worker’s expectation of renewal is recognized, the legal principles restricting dismissal are analogously applied. As with redundancy dismissals, employers must bear the burden of proving the reasonable grounds and procedures for “why this particular worker was not renewed.” By establishing such standards in advance, employers can prevent unfair dismissal disputes and enhance their ability to defend themselves at the Labor Relations Commission stage.
(ⓒ2025 copyright. Labor Attorney Youngseop Moon, Labor Law Firm Law&. Unauthorized reproduction and redistribution are prohibited.)
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Existence of an expectation of renewal of the employment contract
(1) The cleaning service contract between the employer and the apartment complex has continued up to the present;
(2) The employer has established internal evaluation criteria and procedures regarding renewal of fixed-term workers’ employment contracts and has been deciding on renewal based on those criteria, and refused to renew this worker’s contract when the worker’s performance evaluation score fell below the threshold score (70 points) for renewal;
Considering these circumstances as a whole, it is reasonable to view that a relationship of trust has been formed between the parties to the employment contract to the effect that the contract will be renewed if certain conditions are met. Accordingly, it is appropriate to find that the worker in this case has an expectation of renewal of the employment contract.
B. Existence of reasonable grounds for refusing renewal of the employment contract
(1) The employer hired the worker to perform cleaning service duties, but the worker failed to comply with work instructions from the apartment management office director and others on 14 January, 27 February, and 4 March 2025, leading to two counseling sessions. When the worker’s work attitude and related matters did not improve, it was confirmed that the management office director requested the employer to replace the worker;
(2) The employer reflected these circumstances in the worker’s personnel evaluation, gave the worker a score of 66 points, below the renewal threshold (70 points), and refused to renew the contract. It is difficult to conclude that this evaluation lacked fairness and objectivity. Therefore, it is determined that there were reasonable grounds for refusing renewal of the employment contract.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
A. Existence of an expectation of renewal of the employment contract
(1) The cleaning service contract between the employer and the apartment complex has continued up to the present;
(2) The employer has established internal evaluation criteria and procedures regarding renewal of fixed-term workers’ employment contracts and has been deciding on renewal based on those criteria, and refused to renew this worker’s contract when the worker’s performance evaluation score fell below the threshold score (70 points) for renewal;
Considering these circumstances as a whole, it is reasonable to view that a relationship of trust has been formed between the parties to the employment contract to the effect that the contract will be renewed if certain conditions are met. Accordingly, it is appropriate to find that the worker in this case has an expectation of renewal of the employment contract.
B. Existence of reasonable grounds for refusing renewal of the employment contract
(1) The employer hired the worker to perform cleaning service duties, but the worker failed to comply with work instructions from the apartment management office director and others on 14 January, 27 February, and 4 March 2025, leading to two counseling sessions. When the worker’s work attitude and related matters did not improve, it was confirmed that the management office director requested the employer to replace the worker;
(2) The employer reflected these circumstances in the worker’s personnel evaluation, gave the worker a score of 66 points, below the renewal threshold (70 points), and refused to renew the contract. It is difficult to conclude that this evaluation lacked fairness and objectivity. Therefore, it is determined that there were reasonable grounds for refusing renewal of the employment contract. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Non-Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)’” – Decision date: – Case result: First-instance decision upheld
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Disciplinary Severity (Request for Change in Research Service Tasks)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expectation of renewal (apartment cleaning services), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, violation of company policy · failure to follow work instructions, 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 ‘Disciplinary Severity (Request for Change in Research Service Tasks)’,” in a new window.
※ You can also view the list of decisions related to expectation of renewal (apartment cleaning services) at the “Expectation of Renewal (Apartment Cleaning Services) Related Decisions List.”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision that concluded with the first-instance decision being upheld on the issue of “expectation of renewal (apartment cleaning services).”
Decision Committee: Central Labor Relations Commission 2025Buhae1284 ○ ○ ○ Application for Re-examination for Remedy of Unfair Dismissal
2025.12.10 · Case Result: First-instance decision upheld
Summary of key issues:
A. Existence of an expectation of renewal of the employment contract
(1) The cleaning service contract between the employer and the apartment complex has continued up to the present;
(2) The employer has established internal evaluation criteria and procedures regarding renewal of fixed-term workers’ employment contracts and has been deciding on renewal based on those criteria, and refused to renew this worker’s contract when the worker’s performance evaluation score fell below the threshold score (70 points) for renewal;
In light of the above circumstances as a whole, it was considered that a relationship of trust had been formed between the parties to the employment contract to the effect that the contract would be renewed if certain conditions were met…
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
This unfair dismissal case concerns a fixed-term worker employed at an apartment complex as a cleaning service worker who applied to the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal after the employer refused to renew the contract upon its expiration. The cleaning service contract between the employer and the apartment complex remained in force, and the employer had been deciding on renewals based on internal personnel evaluation criteria, but refused to renew only this worker’s contract. This became the central issue. The Central Labor Relations Commission upheld the first-instance decision (no unfair dismissal).
Ⅱ. Issues in Dispute
The issue in this case is whether, in circumstances where a fixed-term apartment cleaning service worker has an expectation of renewal of the employment contract, there exists a reasonable ground for refusing renewal based on the results of a personnel evaluation. Furthermore, even where an expectation of renewal is recognized, the question arose whether a refusal to renew constitutes unfair dismissal if the evaluation criteria and their operation, as established by the employer, fall within an objective and fair range.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The decision panel in this case noted that the cleaning service contract between the employer and the apartment complex was ongoing, that the employer had been deciding on the renewal of fixed-term workers based on a concrete standard and procedure—namely, a score of 70 points or higher—and that the worker in question received a score of 66 points, below the threshold, in the personnel evaluation.
Considering the content of the employment contract and the established practice of renewal, the panel found that the worker did have an expectation of renewal. However, it also found that there had been multiple counseling sessions due to the worker’s repeated failure to comply with work instructions, that the apartment management office director had requested the worker’s replacement, and that these circumstances had been reflected in the evaluation. In light of this, the panel concluded that it was difficult to regard the personnel evaluation as markedly arbitrary or lacking in fairness and objectivity.
The panel held that, under the legal principle that even where an expectation of renewal is recognized, a refusal to renew cannot be deemed unfair dismissal if there is a reasonable ground for such refusal, the employer’s refusal to renew the contract fell within a socially acceptable and reasonable range. Accordingly, the refusal was not found to be unfair.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective)
From the worker’s perspective, it is important to understand that an expectation of renewal may be recognized where there are concrete provisions in the employment contract, rules of employment, or internal personnel evaluation criteria stating, for example, that “the contract will be renewed if a certain score is achieved.” However, even if an expectation of renewal is recognized, a refusal to renew may be deemed justified if repeated failure to follow work instructions or issues with work attitude are objectively reflected in the personnel evaluation. It is therefore crucial to keep records on an ongoing basis, such as notes of counseling sessions, evidence of compliance or non-compliance with instructions, and indications of unfairness in the evaluation process. When disputing the matter before the Labor Relations Commission or the courts, one must not simply challenge the low score itself, but must specifically prove, with supporting materials, that the evaluation items and their application were discriminatory or arbitrary.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, the key is to clearly set out in writing the criteria and procedures for renewing fixed-term workers and to apply those criteria consistently in practice. In a structure where an expectation of renewal is recognized, as in this case, if the grounds for refusing renewal relate to the worker’s responsibility—such as work attitude or failure to follow work instructions—the employer must retain objective records of the circumstances, including the background, content of counseling sessions, requests for correction, and whether there was improvement (e.g. counseling notes, written instructions, photographs). The employer should also check in advance whether the linkage between personnel evaluation scores and renewal decisions is applied in the same way to other workers, and whether the evaluation items are vague or targeted at a specific individual.
Finally, where a fixed-term worker’s expectation of renewal is recognized, the legal principles restricting dismissal are analogously applied. As with redundancy dismissals, employers must bear the burden of proving the reasonable grounds and procedures for “why this particular worker was not renewed.” By establishing such standards in advance, employers can prevent unfair dismissal disputes and enhance their ability to defend themselves at the Labor Relations Commission stage.
(ⓒ2025 copyright. Labor Attorney Youngseop Moon, Labor Law Firm Law&. Unauthorized reproduction and redistribution are prohibited.)
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Existence of an expectation of renewal of the employment contract
(1) The cleaning service contract between the employer and the apartment complex has continued up to the present;
(2) The employer has established internal evaluation criteria and procedures regarding renewal of fixed-term workers’ employment contracts and has been deciding on renewal based on those criteria, and refused to renew this worker’s contract when the worker’s performance evaluation score fell below the threshold score (70 points) for renewal;
Considering these circumstances as a whole, it is reasonable to view that a relationship of trust has been formed between the parties to the employment contract to the effect that the contract will be renewed if certain conditions are met. Accordingly, it is appropriate to find that the worker in this case has an expectation of renewal of the employment contract.
B. Existence of reasonable grounds for refusing renewal of the employment contract
(1) The employer hired the worker to perform cleaning service duties, but the worker failed to comply with work instructions from the apartment management office director and others on 14 January, 27 February, and 4 March 2025, leading to two counseling sessions. When the worker’s work attitude and related matters did not improve, it was confirmed that the management office director requested the employer to replace the worker;
(2) The employer reflected these circumstances in the worker’s personnel evaluation, gave the worker a score of 66 points, below the renewal threshold (70 points), and refused to renew the contract. It is difficult to conclude that this evaluation lacked fairness and objectivity. Therefore, it is determined that there were reasonable grounds for refusing renewal of the employment contract.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
A. Existence of an expectation of renewal of the employment contract
(1) The cleaning service contract between the employer and the apartment complex has continued up to the present;
(2) The employer has established internal evaluation criteria and procedures regarding renewal of fixed-term workers’ employment contracts and has been deciding on renewal based on those criteria, and refused to renew this worker’s contract when the worker’s performance evaluation score fell below the threshold score (70 points) for renewal;
Considering these circumstances as a whole, it is reasonable to view that a relationship of trust has been formed between the parties to the employment contract to the effect that the contract will be renewed if certain conditions are met. Accordingly, it is appropriate to find that the worker in this case has an expectation of renewal of the employment contract.
B. Existence of reasonable grounds for refusing renewal of the employment contract
(1) The employer hired the worker to perform cleaning service duties, but the worker failed to comply with work instructions from the apartment management office director and others on 14 January, 27 February, and 4 March 2025, leading to two counseling sessions. When the worker’s work attitude and related matters did not improve, it was confirmed that the management office director requested the employer to replace the worker;
(2) The employer reflected these circumstances in the worker’s personnel evaluation, gave the worker a score of 66 points, below the renewal threshold (70 points), and refused to renew the contract. It is difficult to conclude that this evaluation lacked fairness and objectivity. Therefore, it is determined that there were reasonable grounds for refusing renewal of the employment contract. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Non-Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)’” – Decision date: – Case result: First-instance decision upheld
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Disciplinary Severity (Request for Change in Research Service Tasks)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expectation of renewal (apartment cleaning services), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, violation of company policy · failure to follow work instructions, 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 ‘Disciplinary Severity (Request for Change in Research Service Tasks)’,” in a new window.
※ You can also view the list of decisions related to expectation of renewal (apartment cleaning services) at the “Expectation of Renewal (Apartment Cleaning Services) Related Decisions List.”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
