Corporate trends / Performance record
Unfair Dismissal Decision on “Formation of Hiring Commitment (Notification via Recruitment Agency)” (Unfair Dismissal 269)
- Date2026/03/09 04:04
- Read 208
[Case Information]
This case is a decision in which the Central Labor Relations Commission upheld the first-instance decision on the issue of “formation of hiring commitment (notification via recruitment agency).”
Decision-making body: Central Labor Relations Commission 2025Buhae1466 ○ ○ ○ Application for Reconsideration of Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026.01.14 · Case result: First-instance decision upheld
Summary of key issue: For a hiring commitment to be deemed formed, the employer’s definitive intent to hire must be expressed externally and objectively. In this case, the worker did not receive any final acceptance notice from the employer, but only a notification of the interview result from the recruitment agency. During that process, the worker asked whether this meant that he had been accepted, and the agency’s representative replied to the effect that “you passed the interview, but you are on standby for joining,” without specifying the start date of employment and other concrete details...
1. Legal Implications
This post reviews a Central Labor Relations Commission decision in an unfair dismissal remedy case where the parties disputed whether a hiring commitment had been formed, and organizes the Commission’s reasoning and practical implications. As disputes frequently arise at the hiring stage, understanding the Labor Relations Commission’s criteria will be helpful. This post also reflects the practical experience of Labor Law Firm Law&, which has handled numerous unfair dismissal cases.
Ⅰ. Case Overview
The worker applied for the employer’s recruitment process through a recruitment agency and proceeded to the interview stage. The worker asserted that he subsequently received a notification from the recruitment agency regarding the interview result. He treated this as a hiring commitment followed by an unfair dismissal and applied to the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy. When the first-instance commission ruled in favor of the employer, the worker appealed to the Central Labor Relations Commission.
Ⅱ. Issue Summary
The issue in this case is whether, in circumstances where the worker only received guidance from the recruitment agency to the effect that he had passed the interview and was on standby for joining, a definitive hiring commitment between the employer and the worker can be deemed to have been formed.
In other words, to file for a remedy for unfair dismissal under the Labor Standards Act, there must first be a recognized employment contract or hiring commitment. The core issue in this case was whether that very premise was established.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case held that, for a hiring commitment to be formed, the employer’s definitive intent to hire must be clearly expressed externally and objectively. The worker had never directly received from the employer any notice of final acceptance or hiring commitment. The recruitment agency’s representative merely informed the worker that “you passed the interview, but you are on standby for joining,” revealing only a conditional intent to hire without concretely fixing the start date of employment, working conditions, etc.
In light of this, the notification the worker received amounted only to informing him that he had passed the interview and that there was a possibility of future hiring, and could not readily be regarded as an expression of the employer’s definitive intent to hire. Accordingly, it was difficult to conclude that an employment contract relationship in the form of a hiring commitment had been formed between the employer and the worker.
On this basis, the Commission held that, because the underlying employment relationship itself was not established, the dismissal in this case did not constitute unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective)
From the worker’s standpoint, rather than relying solely on oral explanations from a recruitment agency or HR staff and believing that hiring has been finalized, it is important to confirm clearly—via email, text message, etc.—whether you have received a notice explicitly stating “final acceptance” or “hiring commitment,” together with key terms such as start date, position, and wages. To prepare for potential disputes, it is also advisable to systematically preserve evidence, such as summaries of phone calls and screenshots of texts and emails.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, it is advisable to clearly distinguish between document screening pass, interview pass, and final acceptance (hiring commitment), and to include explicit wording at each stage such as “final hiring will be notified separately.” Where a recruitment agency is used, the scope of expressions and authority that the agency may use when communicating with candidates should be set out in advance in contracts or manuals, so as to prevent statements that could be mistaken for a hiring commitment.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
For a hiring commitment to be formed, the employer’s definitive intent to hire must be expressed externally and objectively. In this case, the worker did not receive any final acceptance notice from the employer and was only notified of the interview result by the recruitment agency. During that process, the worker asked whether he had received a notice of acceptance, and the agency’s representative replied to the effect that “you passed the interview, but you are on standby for joining,” thereby expressing only a conditional intent to hire without specifying the start date of employment and other details. Accordingly, it cannot be viewed that a definitive intent to hire was notified to the worker, and it is difficult to conclude that a hiring commitment was formed between the parties.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
For a hiring commitment to be formed, the employer’s definitive intent to hire must be expressed externally and objectively. In this case, the worker did not receive any final acceptance notice from the employer and was only notified of the interview result by the recruitment agency. During that process, the worker asked whether he had received a notice of acceptance, and the agency’s representative replied to the effect that “you passed the interview, but you are on standby for joining,” thereby expressing only a conditional intent to hire without specifying the start date of employment and other details. Accordingly, it cannot be viewed that a definitive intent to hire was notified to the worker, and it is difficult to conclude that a hiring commitment was formed between the parties. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unformed Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)” Unfair Dismissal Decision – Decision date: - Case result: First-instance decision upheld
- “Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)” Unfair Dismissal Decision
- “Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)” Unfair Dismissal Decision
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, formation of hiring commitment (notification via recruitment agency), others, Labor Law Firm Law&, large labor law firm, Samseong-dong labor law firm, Samseong Station labor law firm, Gangnam labor law firm
※ This post is part of Labor Law Firm Law&’s “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series.
※ You can view the previous post, “‘Disciplinary Dismissal for Sexual Harassment (Victim in Lower Position / Non-Regular Worker)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window.
※ You can also view the list of decisions related to formation of hiring commitment (notification via recruitment agency) at “List of Decisions on Formation of Hiring Commitment (Notification via Recruitment Agency).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision in which the Central Labor Relations Commission upheld the first-instance decision on the issue of “formation of hiring commitment (notification via recruitment agency).”
Decision-making body: Central Labor Relations Commission 2025Buhae1466 ○ ○ ○ Application for Reconsideration of Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026.01.14 · Case result: First-instance decision upheld
Summary of key issue: For a hiring commitment to be deemed formed, the employer’s definitive intent to hire must be expressed externally and objectively. In this case, the worker did not receive any final acceptance notice from the employer, but only a notification of the interview result from the recruitment agency. During that process, the worker asked whether this meant that he had been accepted, and the agency’s representative replied to the effect that “you passed the interview, but you are on standby for joining,” without specifying the start date of employment and other concrete details...
1. Legal Implications
This post reviews a Central Labor Relations Commission decision in an unfair dismissal remedy case where the parties disputed whether a hiring commitment had been formed, and organizes the Commission’s reasoning and practical implications. As disputes frequently arise at the hiring stage, understanding the Labor Relations Commission’s criteria will be helpful. This post also reflects the practical experience of Labor Law Firm Law&, which has handled numerous unfair dismissal cases.
Ⅰ. Case Overview
The worker applied for the employer’s recruitment process through a recruitment agency and proceeded to the interview stage. The worker asserted that he subsequently received a notification from the recruitment agency regarding the interview result. He treated this as a hiring commitment followed by an unfair dismissal and applied to the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy. When the first-instance commission ruled in favor of the employer, the worker appealed to the Central Labor Relations Commission.
Ⅱ. Issue Summary
The issue in this case is whether, in circumstances where the worker only received guidance from the recruitment agency to the effect that he had passed the interview and was on standby for joining, a definitive hiring commitment between the employer and the worker can be deemed to have been formed.
In other words, to file for a remedy for unfair dismissal under the Labor Standards Act, there must first be a recognized employment contract or hiring commitment. The core issue in this case was whether that very premise was established.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case held that, for a hiring commitment to be formed, the employer’s definitive intent to hire must be clearly expressed externally and objectively. The worker had never directly received from the employer any notice of final acceptance or hiring commitment. The recruitment agency’s representative merely informed the worker that “you passed the interview, but you are on standby for joining,” revealing only a conditional intent to hire without concretely fixing the start date of employment, working conditions, etc.
In light of this, the notification the worker received amounted only to informing him that he had passed the interview and that there was a possibility of future hiring, and could not readily be regarded as an expression of the employer’s definitive intent to hire. Accordingly, it was difficult to conclude that an employment contract relationship in the form of a hiring commitment had been formed between the employer and the worker.
On this basis, the Commission held that, because the underlying employment relationship itself was not established, the dismissal in this case did not constitute unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective)
From the worker’s standpoint, rather than relying solely on oral explanations from a recruitment agency or HR staff and believing that hiring has been finalized, it is important to confirm clearly—via email, text message, etc.—whether you have received a notice explicitly stating “final acceptance” or “hiring commitment,” together with key terms such as start date, position, and wages. To prepare for potential disputes, it is also advisable to systematically preserve evidence, such as summaries of phone calls and screenshots of texts and emails.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, it is advisable to clearly distinguish between document screening pass, interview pass, and final acceptance (hiring commitment), and to include explicit wording at each stage such as “final hiring will be notified separately.” Where a recruitment agency is used, the scope of expressions and authority that the agency may use when communicating with candidates should be set out in advance in contracts or manuals, so as to prevent statements that could be mistaken for a hiring commitment.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
For a hiring commitment to be formed, the employer’s definitive intent to hire must be expressed externally and objectively. In this case, the worker did not receive any final acceptance notice from the employer and was only notified of the interview result by the recruitment agency. During that process, the worker asked whether he had received a notice of acceptance, and the agency’s representative replied to the effect that “you passed the interview, but you are on standby for joining,” thereby expressing only a conditional intent to hire without specifying the start date of employment and other details. Accordingly, it cannot be viewed that a definitive intent to hire was notified to the worker, and it is difficult to conclude that a hiring commitment was formed between the parties.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
For a hiring commitment to be formed, the employer’s definitive intent to hire must be expressed externally and objectively. In this case, the worker did not receive any final acceptance notice from the employer and was only notified of the interview result by the recruitment agency. During that process, the worker asked whether he had received a notice of acceptance, and the agency’s representative replied to the effect that “you passed the interview, but you are on standby for joining,” thereby expressing only a conditional intent to hire without specifying the start date of employment and other details. Accordingly, it cannot be viewed that a definitive intent to hire was notified to the worker, and it is difficult to conclude that a hiring commitment was formed between the parties. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unformed Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)” Unfair Dismissal Decision – Decision date: - Case result: First-instance decision upheld
- “Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)” Unfair Dismissal Decision
- “Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)” Unfair Dismissal Decision
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, formation of hiring commitment (notification via recruitment agency), others, Labor Law Firm Law&, large labor law firm, Samseong-dong labor law firm, Samseong Station labor law firm, Gangnam labor law firm
※ This post is part of Labor Law Firm Law&’s “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series.
※ You can view the previous post, “‘Disciplinary Dismissal for Sexual Harassment (Victim in Lower Position / Non-Regular Worker)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window.
※ You can also view the list of decisions related to formation of hiring commitment (notification via recruitment agency) at “List of Decisions on Formation of Hiring Commitment (Notification via Recruitment Agency).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
