Corporate trends / Performance record
Non-Existence of Legitimate Expectation of Renewal (Apartment Cleaner) – Unfair Dismissal Decision (Unfair Dismissal 288)
- Date2026/03/16 04:08
- Read 206
[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 (apartment cleaner).”
Adjudicating Body: Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission
2025 Unfair Dismissal 9119 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2026.01.12 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of Key Issues:
A. Whether an employment contract was in substance an employment contract with no fixed term
The employment contract clearly specifies the contract period as 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025. The employee asserted that, at the time the contract was prepared, no contract end date was entered, but no evidence was found to support this assertion.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
This case concerns an application for remedy for unfair dismissal filed by an apartment complex cleaner against the employer, which was contested before the Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission. The employee argued that her employment contract was in substance an employment contract with no fixed term, or at least that she had a legitimate expectation of renewal of the contract, and therefore termination on the ground of contract expiration constituted unfair dismissal.
The Labor Relations Commission reviewed the employment contract, the contract forms of other cleaners, and the practice regarding contract renewals, and after comprehensive deliberation on whether the case constituted unfair dismissal, dismissed the employee’s application for remedy.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is:
“Where an apartment cleaner, whose employment contract specifies a fixed term, has entered into only a single fixed-term employment contract, can that contract be regarded in substance as an employment contract with no fixed term, and furthermore, can the employee be deemed to have a legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract?”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The adjudicating panel in this case found that the employment contract clearly states the period from 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025; that although the employee claimed that no end date was entered at the time the contract was prepared, there was no objective evidence whatsoever to support this; and that all of the other cleaners’ employment contracts likewise specify the same contract period, making it difficult to regard the fixed term as a mere formality.
Accordingly, the panel held that the employee’s employment contract could not be regarded in substance as an employment contract with no fixed term.
In addition, the work rules and the employment contract contained no provision to the effect that “if certain conditions are met, the contract will be renewed”; the employer first entered into fixed-term employment contracts with the cleaners, including the employee, on 28 July 2025, and there had been no prior instances of renewal; and of the total of 12 cleaners, including this employee, three actually left employment upon contract expiration on 30 September 2025.
In light of these circumstances, the panel found it difficult to conclude that a relationship of trust had been formed between the parties to the employment contract whereby the contract would be renewed if certain conditions were satisfied, and therefore held that the employee did not have a legitimate expectation of renewal of the contract. The panel determined that the termination in this case constituted automatic retirement due to expiration of the contract term, and did not amount to unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Where the contract period is specified in the employment contract, you should keep in mind the basic legal principle that, absent special circumstances, the employment relationship automatically terminates upon expiration of the term. For a legitimate expectation of renewal to be recognized, there must generally be multiple repeated renewals, or a trust formed through work rules, contracts, or established practice that “if certain conditions are met, employment will continue.” A single fixed-term contract and some indications that certain colleagues were re-contracted are often insufficient.
Accordingly, when you are hired as a fixed-term employee, you should check in advance the contract period, the criteria and procedures for re-contracting, and the renewal practices for existing employees. To prepare for potential future disputes, you should, as far as possible, keep in written or photographic form any explanations given by the employer, as well as notices, announcements, and similar documents. When applying to the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal (including redundancy dismissals), you must prepare sufficient objective evidence to support your claim that you had a status equivalent to an indefinite-term employee or that you had a legitimate expectation of renewal.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, when utilizing fixed-term employment contracts, it is important to clearly specify the contract period in the employment contract and to make explicit in the work rules and HR regulations that “the employment relationship automatically terminates upon expiration of the contract period.” At the same time, if you have not established separate criteria or procedures for re-contracting and have instead exercised discretion based on manpower needs and work performance, you should continuously record and manage actual operational cases so that repeated renewals for some employees are not broadly interpreted as creating a general expectation of renewal for all employees.
In workplaces such as apartment complexes where many fixed-term employees (e.g., cleaners) are engaged, documenting and distinguishing between cases of actual separation upon contract expiration and cases of re-contracting will be very helpful in later demonstrating to the Labor Relations Commission the non-existence of a legitimate expectation of renewal. Furthermore, to prevent unfair dismissal disputes, you should seek advice from a specialized labor law firm such as Labor Law Firm Law& in advance, and refine your methods for managing fixed-term employees and your procedures for redundancy dismissals and contract expirations.
2. Matters Adjudicated
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Whether an employment contract in substance without a fixed term was concluded
The employment contract clearly specifies the period of employment as 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025, and although the employee asserts that no contract end date was entered at the time the employment contract was prepared, no evidence has been identified to support this assertion. In addition, a review of the employment contracts of the apartment cleaners submitted by the employer shows that the contract period for all cleaners, including the employee, is from 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025. It is therefore difficult to regard the fixed term as a mere formality, and the employee’s employment contract cannot be deemed in substance to be an employment contract with no fixed term.
B. Whether a legitimate expectation of renewal is recognized
The work rules and employment contract contain no provision to the effect that, notwithstanding the expiration of the contract period specified in the employment contract, the contract will be renewed if certain conditions are met. The employer first entered into employment contracts with the employee and the other cleaners on 28 July 2025, and there had been no prior instances of contract renewal. The employee entered into only one fixed-term employment contract with the employer, with the period specified as 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025. Furthermore, considering that among the total of 12 employees who worked as cleaners at the apartment, there were three other employees whose contracts expired on 30 September 2025, it cannot be concluded that a relationship of trust was formed between the parties to the employment contract whereby the contract would be renewed if certain conditions were met, or that the employee had a legitimate expectation that the employment contract would be renewed.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
A. Whether an employment contract in substance without a fixed term was concluded
The employment contract clearly specifies the period of employment as 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025, and although the employee asserts that no contract end date was entered at the time the employment contract was prepared, no evidence has been identified to support this assertion. In addition, a review of the employment contracts of the apartment cleaners submitted by the employer shows that the contract period for all cleaners, including the employee, is from 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025. It is therefore difficult to regard the fixed term as a mere formality, and the employee’s employment contract cannot be deemed in substance to be an employment contract with no fixed term.
B. Whether a legitimate expectation of renewal is recognized
The work rules and employment contract contain no provision to the effect that, notwithstanding the expiration of the contract period specified in the employment contract, the contract will be renewed if certain conditions are met. The employer first entered into employment contracts with the employee and the other cleaners on 28 July 2025, and there had been no prior instances of contract renewal. The employee entered into only one fixed-term employment contract with the employer, with the period specified as 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025. Furthermore, considering that among the total of 12 employees who worked as cleaners at the apartment, there were three other employees whose contracts expired on 30 September 2025, it cannot be concluded that a relationship of trust was formed between the parties to the employment contract whereby the contract would be renewed if certain conditions were met, or that the employee had a legitimate expectation that the employment contract would be renewed. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “‘Existence of Dismissal (Recording of Suspension and Standby Order)’ – Unfair Dismissal Decision”
- “‘Non-Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)’ – Unfair Dismissal Decision” – Decision date: – Case number: First-instance decision upheld
- “‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’ – Unfair Dismissal Decision”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, non-existence of legitimate expectation of renewal (apartment cleaner), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, 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, “‘Existence of Dismissal (Recording of Suspension and Standby Order)’ – Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to non-existence of legitimate expectation of renewal (apartment cleaner) can be viewed together on the “Non-Existence of Legitimate Expectation of Renewal (Apartment Cleaner) – Related Decisions” page.
※ 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 (apartment cleaner).”
Adjudicating Body: Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission
2025 Unfair Dismissal 9119 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2026.01.12 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of Key Issues:
A. Whether an employment contract was in substance an employment contract with no fixed term
The employment contract clearly specifies the contract period as 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025. The employee asserted that, at the time the contract was prepared, no contract end date was entered, but no evidence was found to support this assertion.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
This case concerns an application for remedy for unfair dismissal filed by an apartment complex cleaner against the employer, which was contested before the Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission. The employee argued that her employment contract was in substance an employment contract with no fixed term, or at least that she had a legitimate expectation of renewal of the contract, and therefore termination on the ground of contract expiration constituted unfair dismissal.
The Labor Relations Commission reviewed the employment contract, the contract forms of other cleaners, and the practice regarding contract renewals, and after comprehensive deliberation on whether the case constituted unfair dismissal, dismissed the employee’s application for remedy.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is:
“Where an apartment cleaner, whose employment contract specifies a fixed term, has entered into only a single fixed-term employment contract, can that contract be regarded in substance as an employment contract with no fixed term, and furthermore, can the employee be deemed to have a legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract?”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The adjudicating panel in this case found that the employment contract clearly states the period from 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025; that although the employee claimed that no end date was entered at the time the contract was prepared, there was no objective evidence whatsoever to support this; and that all of the other cleaners’ employment contracts likewise specify the same contract period, making it difficult to regard the fixed term as a mere formality.
Accordingly, the panel held that the employee’s employment contract could not be regarded in substance as an employment contract with no fixed term.
In addition, the work rules and the employment contract contained no provision to the effect that “if certain conditions are met, the contract will be renewed”; the employer first entered into fixed-term employment contracts with the cleaners, including the employee, on 28 July 2025, and there had been no prior instances of renewal; and of the total of 12 cleaners, including this employee, three actually left employment upon contract expiration on 30 September 2025.
In light of these circumstances, the panel found it difficult to conclude that a relationship of trust had been formed between the parties to the employment contract whereby the contract would be renewed if certain conditions were satisfied, and therefore held that the employee did not have a legitimate expectation of renewal of the contract. The panel determined that the termination in this case constituted automatic retirement due to expiration of the contract term, and did not amount to unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Where the contract period is specified in the employment contract, you should keep in mind the basic legal principle that, absent special circumstances, the employment relationship automatically terminates upon expiration of the term. For a legitimate expectation of renewal to be recognized, there must generally be multiple repeated renewals, or a trust formed through work rules, contracts, or established practice that “if certain conditions are met, employment will continue.” A single fixed-term contract and some indications that certain colleagues were re-contracted are often insufficient.
Accordingly, when you are hired as a fixed-term employee, you should check in advance the contract period, the criteria and procedures for re-contracting, and the renewal practices for existing employees. To prepare for potential future disputes, you should, as far as possible, keep in written or photographic form any explanations given by the employer, as well as notices, announcements, and similar documents. When applying to the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal (including redundancy dismissals), you must prepare sufficient objective evidence to support your claim that you had a status equivalent to an indefinite-term employee or that you had a legitimate expectation of renewal.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, when utilizing fixed-term employment contracts, it is important to clearly specify the contract period in the employment contract and to make explicit in the work rules and HR regulations that “the employment relationship automatically terminates upon expiration of the contract period.” At the same time, if you have not established separate criteria or procedures for re-contracting and have instead exercised discretion based on manpower needs and work performance, you should continuously record and manage actual operational cases so that repeated renewals for some employees are not broadly interpreted as creating a general expectation of renewal for all employees.
In workplaces such as apartment complexes where many fixed-term employees (e.g., cleaners) are engaged, documenting and distinguishing between cases of actual separation upon contract expiration and cases of re-contracting will be very helpful in later demonstrating to the Labor Relations Commission the non-existence of a legitimate expectation of renewal. Furthermore, to prevent unfair dismissal disputes, you should seek advice from a specialized labor law firm such as Labor Law Firm Law& in advance, and refine your methods for managing fixed-term employees and your procedures for redundancy dismissals and contract expirations.
2. Matters Adjudicated
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Whether an employment contract in substance without a fixed term was concluded
The employment contract clearly specifies the period of employment as 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025, and although the employee asserts that no contract end date was entered at the time the employment contract was prepared, no evidence has been identified to support this assertion. In addition, a review of the employment contracts of the apartment cleaners submitted by the employer shows that the contract period for all cleaners, including the employee, is from 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025. It is therefore difficult to regard the fixed term as a mere formality, and the employee’s employment contract cannot be deemed in substance to be an employment contract with no fixed term.
B. Whether a legitimate expectation of renewal is recognized
The work rules and employment contract contain no provision to the effect that, notwithstanding the expiration of the contract period specified in the employment contract, the contract will be renewed if certain conditions are met. The employer first entered into employment contracts with the employee and the other cleaners on 28 July 2025, and there had been no prior instances of contract renewal. The employee entered into only one fixed-term employment contract with the employer, with the period specified as 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025. Furthermore, considering that among the total of 12 employees who worked as cleaners at the apartment, there were three other employees whose contracts expired on 30 September 2025, it cannot be concluded that a relationship of trust was formed between the parties to the employment contract whereby the contract would be renewed if certain conditions were met, or that the employee had a legitimate expectation that the employment contract would be renewed.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
A. Whether an employment contract in substance without a fixed term was concluded
The employment contract clearly specifies the period of employment as 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025, and although the employee asserts that no contract end date was entered at the time the employment contract was prepared, no evidence has been identified to support this assertion. In addition, a review of the employment contracts of the apartment cleaners submitted by the employer shows that the contract period for all cleaners, including the employee, is from 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025. It is therefore difficult to regard the fixed term as a mere formality, and the employee’s employment contract cannot be deemed in substance to be an employment contract with no fixed term.
B. Whether a legitimate expectation of renewal is recognized
The work rules and employment contract contain no provision to the effect that, notwithstanding the expiration of the contract period specified in the employment contract, the contract will be renewed if certain conditions are met. The employer first entered into employment contracts with the employee and the other cleaners on 28 July 2025, and there had been no prior instances of contract renewal. The employee entered into only one fixed-term employment contract with the employer, with the period specified as 28 July 2025 to 30 September 2025. Furthermore, considering that among the total of 12 employees who worked as cleaners at the apartment, there were three other employees whose contracts expired on 30 September 2025, it cannot be concluded that a relationship of trust was formed between the parties to the employment contract whereby the contract would be renewed if certain conditions were met, or that the employee had a legitimate expectation that the employment contract would be renewed. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “‘Existence of Dismissal (Recording of Suspension and Standby Order)’ – Unfair Dismissal Decision”
- “‘Non-Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)’ – Unfair Dismissal Decision” – Decision date: – Case number: First-instance decision upheld
- “‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’ – Unfair Dismissal Decision”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, non-existence of legitimate expectation of renewal (apartment cleaner), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, 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, “‘Existence of Dismissal (Recording of Suspension and Standby Order)’ – Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to non-existence of legitimate expectation of renewal (apartment cleaner) can be viewed together on the “Non-Existence of Legitimate Expectation of Renewal (Apartment Cleaner) – Related Decisions” page.
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
