Corporate trends / Performance record
‘Existence of Dismissal (Acceptance of Resignation Recommendation)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision (Unfair Dismissal 325)
- Date2026/03/28 04:13
- Read 204
[Case Information]
This case is a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “existence of dismissal (acceptance of resignation recommendation).”
Decision Committee: Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026Buhae57 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026.03.11 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of key issue: In light of the facts that the employee validly accepted the employer’s recommendation to resign, thereby expressing a legally effective intent of “consent to termination of the employment relationship,” that the employee raised no objection whatsoever to the employer regarding the termination of the employment relationship, and that the employee failed to submit any materials capable of objectively proving the fact of dismissal, it was determined that one cannot conclude that a dismissal occurred.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
This application for remedy for unfair dismissal concerned a situation where an employee left the company following the employer’s recommendation to resign, and the parties disputed before the Labor Relations Commission whether there had been a dismissal and, if so, its legal effect. The Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the employee’s application, finding that this was a typical case in which the key issue is whether the termination of the employment relationship constitutes a dismissal or a resignation/termination by mutual agreement.
Ⅱ. Issues in Dispute
The issue in this case is whether, “where, after the employer recommends resignation, the employee accepts this and agrees to the termination of the employment relationship, such termination can be viewed as an unfair dismissal, or whether it should instead be regarded as a valid resignation/termination by mutual agreement.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The decision panel noted that the employee accepted the employer’s recommendation to resign and consented to the termination of the employment relationship, that the employee did not raise any particular objection with the employer during the process of terminating the employment relationship, and that the employee failed to submit materials such as a notice of dismissal or personnel documents capable of objectively proving the fact of dismissal.
In view of these circumstances, the panel held that it was difficult to conclude that the cause of termination of the employment relationship lay in a unilateral intention of the employer to dismiss. Since the termination is to be evaluated as a resignation or termination by mutual agreement reflecting the employee’s intent, it was determined that there was no “dismissal” subject to remedy for unfair dismissal under the Labor Standards Act.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Where an employee accepts a recommendation to resign and, expressly or implicitly, agrees to the termination of the employment relationship, the employee should bear in mind that, in order to later retract this and assert unfair dismissal, it is necessary to have evidence proving the dismissal, such as a dismissal notice, personnel documents, text messages, or recordings. In particular, if the submission of a resignation letter or the expression of consent to resign was made under coercion or threats, it is important to specifically record the circumstances and details of the pressure.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, even when recommending resignation, it is advisable to retain objective materials—such as written agreements, emails, or interview records—clearly showing that the employee voluntarily chose to resign. Furthermore, if excessive pressure is used to induce resignation as a means of circumventing restrictions on dismissal (e.g., collective redundancies), the termination may be evaluated in substance as a dismissal and deemed an unfair dismissal, even if it is formally styled as a resignation. Accordingly, the content and degree of pressure during the recommendation process should be managed with care.
In order to prevail in this type of case, it is important to correctly understand the legal principles governing whether the cause of termination of the employment relationship is dismissal or resignation/termination by mutual agreement, and to systematically organize the facts and evidence in line with those principles.
2. Matters Decided
a. Case Overview and Procedural History
In light of the facts that the employee validly accepted the employer’s recommendation to resign, thereby expressing a legally effective intent of “consent to termination of the employment relationship,” that the employee raised no objection whatsoever to the employer regarding the termination of the employment relationship, and that the employee failed to submit any materials capable of objectively proving the fact of dismissal, it was determined that one cannot conclude that a dismissal occurred.
3. Summary of the Decision
a. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
In light of the facts that the employee validly accepted the employer’s recommendation to resign, thereby expressing a legally effective intent of “consent to termination of the employment relationship,” that the employee raised no objection whatsoever to the employer regarding the termination of the employment relationship, and that the employee failed to submit any materials capable of objectively proving the fact of dismissal, it was determined that one cannot conclude that a dismissal occurred. /
[More Related Decisions]
- ‘Non-Existence of Expectation of Renewal (Age 75 or Older · Traffic Accident Consent Form)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision
- ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision
- ‘Non-Existence of Grounds for Disciplinary Action (Misidentification of Workplace Sexual Harassment · Bullying)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, existence of dismissal (acceptance of resignation recommendation), 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 part of the “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ You can view the previous article, “‘Non-Existence of Grounds for Disciplinary Action (Misidentification of Workplace Sexual Harassment · Bullying)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to existence of dismissal (acceptance of resignation recommendation) can be viewed under “List of Decisions Related to Existence of Dismissal (Acceptance of Resignation Recommendation).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “existence of dismissal (acceptance of resignation recommendation).”
Decision Committee: Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026Buhae57 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026.03.11 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of key issue: In light of the facts that the employee validly accepted the employer’s recommendation to resign, thereby expressing a legally effective intent of “consent to termination of the employment relationship,” that the employee raised no objection whatsoever to the employer regarding the termination of the employment relationship, and that the employee failed to submit any materials capable of objectively proving the fact of dismissal, it was determined that one cannot conclude that a dismissal occurred.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
This application for remedy for unfair dismissal concerned a situation where an employee left the company following the employer’s recommendation to resign, and the parties disputed before the Labor Relations Commission whether there had been a dismissal and, if so, its legal effect. The Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission dismissed the employee’s application, finding that this was a typical case in which the key issue is whether the termination of the employment relationship constitutes a dismissal or a resignation/termination by mutual agreement.
Ⅱ. Issues in Dispute
The issue in this case is whether, “where, after the employer recommends resignation, the employee accepts this and agrees to the termination of the employment relationship, such termination can be viewed as an unfair dismissal, or whether it should instead be regarded as a valid resignation/termination by mutual agreement.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The decision panel noted that the employee accepted the employer’s recommendation to resign and consented to the termination of the employment relationship, that the employee did not raise any particular objection with the employer during the process of terminating the employment relationship, and that the employee failed to submit materials such as a notice of dismissal or personnel documents capable of objectively proving the fact of dismissal.
In view of these circumstances, the panel held that it was difficult to conclude that the cause of termination of the employment relationship lay in a unilateral intention of the employer to dismiss. Since the termination is to be evaluated as a resignation or termination by mutual agreement reflecting the employee’s intent, it was determined that there was no “dismissal” subject to remedy for unfair dismissal under the Labor Standards Act.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Where an employee accepts a recommendation to resign and, expressly or implicitly, agrees to the termination of the employment relationship, the employee should bear in mind that, in order to later retract this and assert unfair dismissal, it is necessary to have evidence proving the dismissal, such as a dismissal notice, personnel documents, text messages, or recordings. In particular, if the submission of a resignation letter or the expression of consent to resign was made under coercion or threats, it is important to specifically record the circumstances and details of the pressure.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, even when recommending resignation, it is advisable to retain objective materials—such as written agreements, emails, or interview records—clearly showing that the employee voluntarily chose to resign. Furthermore, if excessive pressure is used to induce resignation as a means of circumventing restrictions on dismissal (e.g., collective redundancies), the termination may be evaluated in substance as a dismissal and deemed an unfair dismissal, even if it is formally styled as a resignation. Accordingly, the content and degree of pressure during the recommendation process should be managed with care.
In order to prevail in this type of case, it is important to correctly understand the legal principles governing whether the cause of termination of the employment relationship is dismissal or resignation/termination by mutual agreement, and to systematically organize the facts and evidence in line with those principles.
2. Matters Decided
a. Case Overview and Procedural History
In light of the facts that the employee validly accepted the employer’s recommendation to resign, thereby expressing a legally effective intent of “consent to termination of the employment relationship,” that the employee raised no objection whatsoever to the employer regarding the termination of the employment relationship, and that the employee failed to submit any materials capable of objectively proving the fact of dismissal, it was determined that one cannot conclude that a dismissal occurred.
3. Summary of the Decision
a. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
In light of the facts that the employee validly accepted the employer’s recommendation to resign, thereby expressing a legally effective intent of “consent to termination of the employment relationship,” that the employee raised no objection whatsoever to the employer regarding the termination of the employment relationship, and that the employee failed to submit any materials capable of objectively proving the fact of dismissal, it was determined that one cannot conclude that a dismissal occurred. /
[More Related Decisions]
- ‘Non-Existence of Expectation of Renewal (Age 75 or Older · Traffic Accident Consent Form)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision
- ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision
- ‘Non-Existence of Grounds for Disciplinary Action (Misidentification of Workplace Sexual Harassment · Bullying)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, existence of dismissal (acceptance of resignation recommendation), 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 part of the “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ You can view the previous article, “‘Non-Existence of Grounds for Disciplinary Action (Misidentification of Workplace Sexual Harassment · Bullying)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to existence of dismissal (acceptance of resignation recommendation) can be viewed under “List of Decisions Related to Existence of Dismissal (Acceptance of Resignation Recommendation).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
