Corporate trends / Performance record
‘Resignation Letter as Mutual Termination (Initialed and Handwritten)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision (Unfair Dismissal 286)
- Date2026/03/15 04:13
- Read 217
This case concerns a decision that was finalized at the Central Labor Relations Commission with the first-instance decision being upheld, on the issue of “resignation letter as mutual termination (initialed and handwritten).”
[Case Information]
This case is a precedent in which the issue of “resignation letter as mutual termination (initialed and handwritten)” was disputed and the first-instance decision was ultimately upheld.
Decision Body: Central Labor Relations Commission, 2025BuHae1403 ○ ○ ○ Application for Re-examination for Remedy of Unfair Dismissal
2026.01.12 · Case Result: First-instance decision upheld
Key Issues Summary: (i) The employees submitted resignation letters, in which they personally and by hand filled in their department, position, name, date of birth, date of resignation, and reasons for resignation, then signed and even initialed the resignation letters; (ii) although the employees argued that the employer had prepared the forms in advance and coerced them into writing the resignation letters, no objective evidence was submitted to prove this; (iii) when the employer requested handover of duties and told them to submit any documents needed after resignation, the employees requested issuance of certificates of employment, wage and salary income withholding tax receipts, etc. …
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, after the employees submitted resignation letters, they filed applications with the Labor Relations Commission seeking remedies on the ground of unfair dismissal, and the matter was contested up to the re-examination stage before the Central Labor Relations Commission. The Central Labor Relations Commission assessed, in a comprehensive manner, the genuineness of the resignation letters, whether there had been any coercion to resign, and the subsequent conduct of the parties, in order to determine whether the termination of the employment relationship constituted an unfair dismissal or a mutual termination by the employees’ resignation.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is:
“In a situation where there exist resignation letters that the employees have handwritten and signed, and even initialed, can these be regarded as merely formal resignations coerced by the employer and thus be evaluated as unfair dismissals, or should they be viewed as resignations reflecting the employees’ true intent and a mutual termination, such that no dismissal by the employer exists?”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The decision panel in this case found that: the employees submitted resignation letters in which they personally and by hand filled in their department, position, name, date of birth, date of resignation, and reasons for resignation, then signed and initialed the letters; no objective evidence was submitted to support the employees’ assertion that the employer had prepared the forms in advance and coerced them into writing the resignation letters; when the employer requested a handover of duties and told them to submit any documents needed after resignation, the employees requested issuance of certificates of employment and wage and salary income withholding tax receipts, thereby acting on the premise of their own resignation both before and after; and it was difficult to regard their later requests to rewrite the resignation letters and to be paid an amount equivalent to statutory dismissal notice allowance as a withdrawal of their intention to resign.
In light of the above, the Commission held that the employment contracts were mutually terminated (voluntary resignation) through the employees’ submission of resignation letters and the employer’s acceptance thereof. Accordingly, since the cause of termination of the employment relationship was not a unilateral dismissal by the employer, the Commission found that no dismissal existed in this case and dismissed the application for remedy for unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Where an employee has handwritten and signed a resignation letter and even initialed it, the intention to resign is presumed to be genuine in the absence of special circumstances. Therefore, to overturn this presumption later before the Labor Relations Commission, objective evidence is required to prove that the declaration of intent was not genuine due to coercion, threats, deceit, or similar factors. In addition, if, after submitting a resignation letter, the employee cooperates with the handover of duties and requests issuance of a certificate of employment or wage and salary income withholding tax receipts on the premise of resignation, it may become even more difficult at a later stage to argue that “it was a dismissal.”
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, the practice of formally obtaining resignation letters in order to circumvent restrictions on dismissal, such as collective redundancies, can pose a significant risk in unfair dismissal disputes and should therefore be avoided. However, where an employee submits a handwritten and initialed resignation letter and subsequently behaves consistently on the premise of resignation, the Labor Relations Commission and the courts tend to broadly recognize mutual termination (voluntary resignation). It is therefore important to keep records—through documents, emails, recordings, etc.—of the resignation letter form, the circumstances under which it was prepared, and subsequent handover of duties and document requests.
In this type of case, both employees and employers should bear in mind that whether the submission of a resignation letter constitutes a notice of termination or an offer of mutual termination, and whether it is a declaration of intent that does not reflect the true intention, is the starting point for determining unfair dismissal. It is essential to carefully manage the circumstances before and after the preparation of the resignation letter, and, in the event of a dispute, to respond to Labor Relations Commission procedures with the assistance of a specialized institution such as Labor Law Firm Law&.
2. Matters Decided
a. Case Overview and Procedural History
(i) The employees submitted resignation letters, in which they personally and by hand filled in their department, position, name, date of birth, date of resignation, and reasons for resignation, then signed and even initialed the resignation letters; (ii) although the employees argued that the employer had prepared the forms in advance and coerced them into writing the resignation letters, no objective evidence was submitted to prove this; (iii) when the employer requested a handover of duties and told them to submit any documents needed after resignation, the employees requested issuance of certificates of employment and wage and salary income withholding tax receipts; and (iv) it is difficult to regard the employees’ requests to rewrite the resignation letters and to be paid an amount equivalent to statutory dismissal notice allowance as a withdrawal of their resignation. Taking all of this into account, it was determined that the employment relationship between the parties was terminated by mutual agreement through the employees’ submission of resignation letters, and that no dismissal existed.
3. Summary of the Decision
a. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
(i) The employees submitted resignation letters, in which they personally and by hand filled in their department, position, name, date of birth, date of resignation, and reasons for resignation, then signed and even initialed the resignation letters; (ii) although the employees argued that the employer had prepared the forms in advance and coerced them into writing the resignation letters, no objective evidence was submitted to prove this; (iii) when the employer requested a handover of duties and told them to submit any documents needed after resignation, the employees requested issuance of certificates of employment and wage and salary income withholding tax receipts; and (iv) it is difficult to regard the employees’ requests to rewrite the resignation letters and to be paid an amount equivalent to statutory dismissal notice allowance as a withdrawal of their resignation. Taking all of this into account, it was determined that the employment relationship between the parties was terminated by mutual agreement through the employees’ submission of resignation letters, and that no dismissal existed. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on Expression of Intention to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on Non-Formation of Hiring Decision (Absence of Offer Letter)” – Decision Date: – Case Number: First-instance decision upheld
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on Dismissal of Application (Non-Appearance at Hearing)” – Decision Date: – Case Number: Dismissed
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, resignation letter as mutual termination (initialed and handwritten), 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 one of the “Unfair Dismissal Decision” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Decision on Exclusion Period (Dismissal after Re-examination Request),” in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to resignation letters as mutual termination (initialed and handwritten) can be found together in the “List of Decisions Related to Resignation Letter as Mutual Termination (Initialed and Handwritten).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
[Case Information]
This case is a precedent in which the issue of “resignation letter as mutual termination (initialed and handwritten)” was disputed and the first-instance decision was ultimately upheld.
Decision Body: Central Labor Relations Commission, 2025BuHae1403 ○ ○ ○ Application for Re-examination for Remedy of Unfair Dismissal
2026.01.12 · Case Result: First-instance decision upheld
Key Issues Summary: (i) The employees submitted resignation letters, in which they personally and by hand filled in their department, position, name, date of birth, date of resignation, and reasons for resignation, then signed and even initialed the resignation letters; (ii) although the employees argued that the employer had prepared the forms in advance and coerced them into writing the resignation letters, no objective evidence was submitted to prove this; (iii) when the employer requested handover of duties and told them to submit any documents needed after resignation, the employees requested issuance of certificates of employment, wage and salary income withholding tax receipts, etc. …
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, after the employees submitted resignation letters, they filed applications with the Labor Relations Commission seeking remedies on the ground of unfair dismissal, and the matter was contested up to the re-examination stage before the Central Labor Relations Commission. The Central Labor Relations Commission assessed, in a comprehensive manner, the genuineness of the resignation letters, whether there had been any coercion to resign, and the subsequent conduct of the parties, in order to determine whether the termination of the employment relationship constituted an unfair dismissal or a mutual termination by the employees’ resignation.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is:
“In a situation where there exist resignation letters that the employees have handwritten and signed, and even initialed, can these be regarded as merely formal resignations coerced by the employer and thus be evaluated as unfair dismissals, or should they be viewed as resignations reflecting the employees’ true intent and a mutual termination, such that no dismissal by the employer exists?”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The decision panel in this case found that: the employees submitted resignation letters in which they personally and by hand filled in their department, position, name, date of birth, date of resignation, and reasons for resignation, then signed and initialed the letters; no objective evidence was submitted to support the employees’ assertion that the employer had prepared the forms in advance and coerced them into writing the resignation letters; when the employer requested a handover of duties and told them to submit any documents needed after resignation, the employees requested issuance of certificates of employment and wage and salary income withholding tax receipts, thereby acting on the premise of their own resignation both before and after; and it was difficult to regard their later requests to rewrite the resignation letters and to be paid an amount equivalent to statutory dismissal notice allowance as a withdrawal of their intention to resign.
In light of the above, the Commission held that the employment contracts were mutually terminated (voluntary resignation) through the employees’ submission of resignation letters and the employer’s acceptance thereof. Accordingly, since the cause of termination of the employment relationship was not a unilateral dismissal by the employer, the Commission found that no dismissal existed in this case and dismissed the application for remedy for unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Where an employee has handwritten and signed a resignation letter and even initialed it, the intention to resign is presumed to be genuine in the absence of special circumstances. Therefore, to overturn this presumption later before the Labor Relations Commission, objective evidence is required to prove that the declaration of intent was not genuine due to coercion, threats, deceit, or similar factors. In addition, if, after submitting a resignation letter, the employee cooperates with the handover of duties and requests issuance of a certificate of employment or wage and salary income withholding tax receipts on the premise of resignation, it may become even more difficult at a later stage to argue that “it was a dismissal.”
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, the practice of formally obtaining resignation letters in order to circumvent restrictions on dismissal, such as collective redundancies, can pose a significant risk in unfair dismissal disputes and should therefore be avoided. However, where an employee submits a handwritten and initialed resignation letter and subsequently behaves consistently on the premise of resignation, the Labor Relations Commission and the courts tend to broadly recognize mutual termination (voluntary resignation). It is therefore important to keep records—through documents, emails, recordings, etc.—of the resignation letter form, the circumstances under which it was prepared, and subsequent handover of duties and document requests.
In this type of case, both employees and employers should bear in mind that whether the submission of a resignation letter constitutes a notice of termination or an offer of mutual termination, and whether it is a declaration of intent that does not reflect the true intention, is the starting point for determining unfair dismissal. It is essential to carefully manage the circumstances before and after the preparation of the resignation letter, and, in the event of a dispute, to respond to Labor Relations Commission procedures with the assistance of a specialized institution such as Labor Law Firm Law&.
2. Matters Decided
a. Case Overview and Procedural History
(i) The employees submitted resignation letters, in which they personally and by hand filled in their department, position, name, date of birth, date of resignation, and reasons for resignation, then signed and even initialed the resignation letters; (ii) although the employees argued that the employer had prepared the forms in advance and coerced them into writing the resignation letters, no objective evidence was submitted to prove this; (iii) when the employer requested a handover of duties and told them to submit any documents needed after resignation, the employees requested issuance of certificates of employment and wage and salary income withholding tax receipts; and (iv) it is difficult to regard the employees’ requests to rewrite the resignation letters and to be paid an amount equivalent to statutory dismissal notice allowance as a withdrawal of their resignation. Taking all of this into account, it was determined that the employment relationship between the parties was terminated by mutual agreement through the employees’ submission of resignation letters, and that no dismissal existed.
3. Summary of the Decision
a. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
(i) The employees submitted resignation letters, in which they personally and by hand filled in their department, position, name, date of birth, date of resignation, and reasons for resignation, then signed and even initialed the resignation letters; (ii) although the employees argued that the employer had prepared the forms in advance and coerced them into writing the resignation letters, no objective evidence was submitted to prove this; (iii) when the employer requested a handover of duties and told them to submit any documents needed after resignation, the employees requested issuance of certificates of employment and wage and salary income withholding tax receipts; and (iv) it is difficult to regard the employees’ requests to rewrite the resignation letters and to be paid an amount equivalent to statutory dismissal notice allowance as a withdrawal of their resignation. Taking all of this into account, it was determined that the employment relationship between the parties was terminated by mutual agreement through the employees’ submission of resignation letters, and that no dismissal existed. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on Expression of Intention to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on Non-Formation of Hiring Decision (Absence of Offer Letter)” – Decision Date: – Case Number: First-instance decision upheld
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision on Dismissal of Application (Non-Appearance at Hearing)” – Decision Date: – Case Number: Dismissed
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, resignation letter as mutual termination (initialed and handwritten), 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 one of the “Unfair Dismissal Decision” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Decision on Exclusion Period (Dismissal after Re-examination Request),” in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to resignation letters as mutual termination (initialed and handwritten) can be found together in the “List of Decisions Related to Resignation Letter as Mutual Termination (Initialed and Handwritten).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
