Corporate trends / Performance record
Non-Existence of Renewal Expectation Right (One-Year One-Off Fixed-Term Contract) in Unfair Dismissal Decision (Unfair Dismissal 362)
- Date2026/04/10 04:04
- Read 178
This case concerns a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “non-existence of renewal expectation right (one-year one-off fixed-term contract).”
Adjudicating Body: Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission
Case: 2025부해10178 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2026.02.20 · Result: Dismissed
Key issues in summary: (i) the employee entered into an employment contract with a fixed term of one year, (ii) the employee had entered into only a single employment contract with the employer, (iii) the employment contract contained no provisions on the conditions or procedures for contract renewal, and no rules of employment had been established that could serve as a basis for renewal, (iv) there were no examples of contract renewal for other fixed-term employees performing the same or similar duties, (v) the employee’s subjective expectation or personal familiarity with the employer alone was insufficient to establish any trust relationship concerning renewal…
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, a fixed-term employee expected to continue working after the expiry of a one-year employment contract. When the employer terminated the employment relationship on the ground of contract expiry, the employee claimed unfair dismissal and filed an application for remedy with the Labor Relations Commission. The Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission focused on whether the dismissal was unfair and, in particular, whether the employee had an expectation right to renewal of the fixed-term contract, ultimately ruling in favor of the employer. This article organizes the structure of the unfair dismissal analysis and the Commission’s reasoning, together with the practical experience of Labor Law Firm Law& and relevant case law principles.
Ⅱ. Issues
The issue in this case is whether a fixed-term employee, who has entered into a single one-year employment contract, can be recognized as having a legitimate expectation right to renewal of that contract in the absence of any separate provisions or established practice regarding renewal.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case noted that the employee had entered into only one employment contract with the employer, with the contract term fixed at one year; that neither the employment contract nor any rules of employment contained provisions on the conditions or procedures for renewal, and no rules of employment had been established that could provide a basis for renewal; and that there were no practices or precedents of contract renewal among other fixed-term employees performing the same or similar duties.
In light of these circumstances, the panel found it difficult to conclude that a trust relationship had been formed to the effect that “the contract will be renewed if certain conditions are met” based solely on the employee’s subjective expectation or personal familiarity with the employer. The panel also took into account that the employee had submitted a resignation letter citing contract expiry, and that, under Supreme Court precedent, the mere existence of ongoing, continuous work at the workplace does not automatically give rise to an expectation right to renewal.
On this basis, the panel held that the termination in this case should be regarded as an automatic termination due to the expiry of the fixed term, that no expectation right to renewal of the employment contract could be recognized, and that the employer’s notice of contract expiry did not constitute an unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
For a fixed-term employee to successfully challenge an alleged unfair dismissal, it is not sufficient to argue merely that “the work is of a continuous nature” or that “the employer said they would keep me on.” It is necessary to secure objective grounds, such as whether there have in fact been repeated renewals, whether rules of employment, HR guidelines, or collective agreements contain standards and procedures for renewal, and whether employees in comparable positions have generally had their contracts renewed. In cases like this one, where there is a one-off contract with no provisions or practices regarding renewal, there is a high likelihood that an expectation right to renewal will be denied. Employees should therefore carefully check, at the time of contract execution, their employment status, contract term, and whether any provisions on renewal exist.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, when entering into a fixed-term employment contract, it is important to clearly specify in the employment contract and rules of employment the contract term, whether the contract will automatically terminate upon expiry, and the possibility and criteria for renewal. Furthermore, if fixed-term employees in the same or similar positions are repeatedly renewed or are in effect treated as permanent staff, such practices may later lead to recognition of an expectation right to renewal. Employers should therefore establish HR strategies in advance, linked to plans for conversion to regular employment, workforce reductions, and other personnel management policies.
2. Matters Adjudicated
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
Taking into account: (i) that the employee entered into an employment contract with a fixed term of one year; (ii) that the employee had entered into only a single employment contract with the employer; (iii) that the employment contract contained no provisions on the conditions or procedures for renewal, and no rules of employment had been established that could serve as a basis for renewal; (iv) that there were no cases of contract renewal for fixed-term employees performing the same or similar duties; (v) that no trust relationship concerning renewal can be deemed to have been formed based solely on the employee’s subjective expectation or personal familiarity with the employer; (vi) that the employee submitted a resignation letter citing contract expiry; and (vii) that the mere existence of continuous work at the workplace does not in itself give rise to an expectation right to renewal of the employment contract, the Commission concluded that no expectation right to renewal of the employment contract could be recognized. Accordingly, the employer’s termination of the employment relationship on the ground of expiry of the contract term was found to be justified.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
Taking into account: (i) that the employee entered into an employment contract with a fixed term of one year; (ii) that the employee had entered into only a single employment contract with the employer; (iii) that the employment contract contained no provisions on the conditions or procedures for renewal, and no rules of employment had been established that could serve as a basis for renewal; (iv) that there were no cases of contract renewal for fixed-term employees performing the same or similar duties; (v) that no trust relationship concerning renewal can be deemed to have been formed based solely on the employee’s subjective expectation or personal familiarity with the employer; (vi) that the employee submitted a resignation letter citing contract expiry; and (vii) that the mere existence of continuous work at the workplace does not in itself give rise to an expectation right to renewal of the employment contract, the Commission concluded that no expectation right to renewal of the employment contract could be recognized. Therefore, the employer’s termination of the employment relationship on the ground of expiry of the contract term was found to be justified. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “‘Non-Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)’ in Unfair Dismissal Decision” – Decision date: - · Result: First-instance decision upheld
- “‘Non-Satisfaction of Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’ in Unfair Dismissal Decision”
- “‘Dismissal of Application (Non-Appearance at Hearing)’ in Unfair Dismissal Decision” – Decision date: - · Result: Dismissed
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, non-existence of renewal expectation right (one-year one-off fixed-term contract), 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 (Fewer than Five Employees · Refusal to Sign Fixed-Term Contract)’ in Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to non-existence of renewal expectation right (one-year one-off fixed-term contract) can be found under “List of Decisions on Non-Existence of Renewal Expectation Right (One-Year One-Off Fixed-Term Contract).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
Adjudicating Body: Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission
Case: 2025부해10178 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2026.02.20 · Result: Dismissed
Key issues in summary: (i) the employee entered into an employment contract with a fixed term of one year, (ii) the employee had entered into only a single employment contract with the employer, (iii) the employment contract contained no provisions on the conditions or procedures for contract renewal, and no rules of employment had been established that could serve as a basis for renewal, (iv) there were no examples of contract renewal for other fixed-term employees performing the same or similar duties, (v) the employee’s subjective expectation or personal familiarity with the employer alone was insufficient to establish any trust relationship concerning renewal…
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, a fixed-term employee expected to continue working after the expiry of a one-year employment contract. When the employer terminated the employment relationship on the ground of contract expiry, the employee claimed unfair dismissal and filed an application for remedy with the Labor Relations Commission. The Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission focused on whether the dismissal was unfair and, in particular, whether the employee had an expectation right to renewal of the fixed-term contract, ultimately ruling in favor of the employer. This article organizes the structure of the unfair dismissal analysis and the Commission’s reasoning, together with the practical experience of Labor Law Firm Law& and relevant case law principles.
Ⅱ. Issues
The issue in this case is whether a fixed-term employee, who has entered into a single one-year employment contract, can be recognized as having a legitimate expectation right to renewal of that contract in the absence of any separate provisions or established practice regarding renewal.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case noted that the employee had entered into only one employment contract with the employer, with the contract term fixed at one year; that neither the employment contract nor any rules of employment contained provisions on the conditions or procedures for renewal, and no rules of employment had been established that could provide a basis for renewal; and that there were no practices or precedents of contract renewal among other fixed-term employees performing the same or similar duties.
In light of these circumstances, the panel found it difficult to conclude that a trust relationship had been formed to the effect that “the contract will be renewed if certain conditions are met” based solely on the employee’s subjective expectation or personal familiarity with the employer. The panel also took into account that the employee had submitted a resignation letter citing contract expiry, and that, under Supreme Court precedent, the mere existence of ongoing, continuous work at the workplace does not automatically give rise to an expectation right to renewal.
On this basis, the panel held that the termination in this case should be regarded as an automatic termination due to the expiry of the fixed term, that no expectation right to renewal of the employment contract could be recognized, and that the employer’s notice of contract expiry did not constitute an unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
For a fixed-term employee to successfully challenge an alleged unfair dismissal, it is not sufficient to argue merely that “the work is of a continuous nature” or that “the employer said they would keep me on.” It is necessary to secure objective grounds, such as whether there have in fact been repeated renewals, whether rules of employment, HR guidelines, or collective agreements contain standards and procedures for renewal, and whether employees in comparable positions have generally had their contracts renewed. In cases like this one, where there is a one-off contract with no provisions or practices regarding renewal, there is a high likelihood that an expectation right to renewal will be denied. Employees should therefore carefully check, at the time of contract execution, their employment status, contract term, and whether any provisions on renewal exist.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, when entering into a fixed-term employment contract, it is important to clearly specify in the employment contract and rules of employment the contract term, whether the contract will automatically terminate upon expiry, and the possibility and criteria for renewal. Furthermore, if fixed-term employees in the same or similar positions are repeatedly renewed or are in effect treated as permanent staff, such practices may later lead to recognition of an expectation right to renewal. Employers should therefore establish HR strategies in advance, linked to plans for conversion to regular employment, workforce reductions, and other personnel management policies.
2. Matters Adjudicated
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
Taking into account: (i) that the employee entered into an employment contract with a fixed term of one year; (ii) that the employee had entered into only a single employment contract with the employer; (iii) that the employment contract contained no provisions on the conditions or procedures for renewal, and no rules of employment had been established that could serve as a basis for renewal; (iv) that there were no cases of contract renewal for fixed-term employees performing the same or similar duties; (v) that no trust relationship concerning renewal can be deemed to have been formed based solely on the employee’s subjective expectation or personal familiarity with the employer; (vi) that the employee submitted a resignation letter citing contract expiry; and (vii) that the mere existence of continuous work at the workplace does not in itself give rise to an expectation right to renewal of the employment contract, the Commission concluded that no expectation right to renewal of the employment contract could be recognized. Accordingly, the employer’s termination of the employment relationship on the ground of expiry of the contract term was found to be justified.
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
Taking into account: (i) that the employee entered into an employment contract with a fixed term of one year; (ii) that the employee had entered into only a single employment contract with the employer; (iii) that the employment contract contained no provisions on the conditions or procedures for renewal, and no rules of employment had been established that could serve as a basis for renewal; (iv) that there were no cases of contract renewal for fixed-term employees performing the same or similar duties; (v) that no trust relationship concerning renewal can be deemed to have been formed based solely on the employee’s subjective expectation or personal familiarity with the employer; (vi) that the employee submitted a resignation letter citing contract expiry; and (vii) that the mere existence of continuous work at the workplace does not in itself give rise to an expectation right to renewal of the employment contract, the Commission concluded that no expectation right to renewal of the employment contract could be recognized. Therefore, the employer’s termination of the employment relationship on the ground of expiry of the contract term was found to be justified. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “‘Non-Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)’ in Unfair Dismissal Decision” – Decision date: - · Result: First-instance decision upheld
- “‘Non-Satisfaction of Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’ in Unfair Dismissal Decision”
- “‘Dismissal of Application (Non-Appearance at Hearing)’ in Unfair Dismissal Decision” – Decision date: - · Result: Dismissed
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, non-existence of renewal expectation right (one-year one-off fixed-term contract), 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 (Fewer than Five Employees · Refusal to Sign Fixed-Term Contract)’ in Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to non-existence of renewal expectation right (one-year one-off fixed-term contract) can be found under “List of Decisions on Non-Existence of Renewal Expectation Right (One-Year One-Off Fixed-Term Contract).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
