Corporate trends / Performance record
Case on Unfair Dismissal Relating to “Refusal to Renew (General Site Manager · Conflict over Alleged Sexual Harassment)” (Unfair Dismissal 449)
- Date2026/05/13 04:04
- Read 106
[Case Information]
This case is a decision in which the employer ultimately prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “refusal to renew (general site manager · conflict over alleged sexual harassment).”
Decision-making body: Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026Buhae93 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026.03.25 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of key issues: (a)
1. Legal Implications
This unfair dismissal case concerned whether the refusal to renew the fixed-term employment contract of a general site manager was justified, and was decided by the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission. It is noteworthy in that, although the Commission recognized the employee’s legitimate expectation of renewal, it still ruled in favor of the employer. This type of case is frequently consulted on at Labor Law Firm Law&, and is characterized by a complex interplay of the ordering agency’s bid announcement, the practice of employment succession, allegations of sexual harassment, and conflict with the labor union.
Ⅰ. Case Overview
The employer entered into a two-year service contract with the ordering agency and, in doing so, succeeded to all existing personnel and concluded employment contracts with the workers, including the fixed-term employee serving as general site manager. Upon the expiration of the contract term, the employer refused to renew the general site manager’s employment contract, citing various circumstances such as allegations of sexual harassment, conflict with the labor union, and a summary order for violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (the “Information and Communications Network Act”). The employee filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal, claiming that this refusal to renew constituted an unfair dismissal.
Ⅱ. Issues
The issue in this case was whether, “in circumstances where the employee’s legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract is recognized based on the bid announcement and the practice of employment succession, the employer’s refusal to renew the general site manager’s employment contract on the grounds of allegations of sexual harassment and conflict with the labor union, among others, was supported by a reasonable cause.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case noted that the ordering agency’s bid announcement explicitly stated that “absent special circumstances, existing employees shall be succeeded and their employment maintained,” that the employer had won the bid by conforming to the service contract standards of the ordering agency, and that the employer had in fact succeeded to all employees for the entire two-year contract period. Taking these circumstances together, the Commission held that the employee had a legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract.
At the same time, the Commission considered that the employee held the position of general site manager, bearing responsibility for the entire worksite; that, in relation to the allegations of sexual harassment, the labor union strongly opposed the succession of the employee’s employment, and that the conflict between the employee and the union had become so serious that it had become difficult for the employee to perform managerial and supervisory functions; that, although the criminal authorities had decided not to prosecute the sexual harassment allegations due to “insufficient evidence,” there were multiple alleged victims and their statements could not be lightly dismissed, so these circumstances continued to operate as factors undermining trust in the exercise of the employer’s personnel discretion; that there was no evidence supporting the employee’s assertion that the employer had promised to re-conclude the employment contract; and that, in the course of the conflict with the labor union, the employee had received a summary order for violation of the Information and Communications Network Act. In light of all these factors, the Commission determined that the employer’s notification of contract expiration, after considering the various circumstances, constituted a refusal to renew based on a “reasonable cause” that is acceptable under social norms.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Even fixed-term employees may be recognized as having a legitimate expectation of renewal where there are bid announcements, promises of employment succession, or a repeated practice of renewal. It is therefore important to keep and organize relevant documents and evidence of such practices on an ongoing basis. However, even if a legitimate expectation of renewal is recognized, in positions such as a general site manager that involve managerial and supervisory functions, accumulated factors such as allegations of sexual harassment, serious conflict with the labor union, and a criminal record may be evaluated as reasonable grounds for refusal to renew. Accordingly, in the course of performing your duties, you should do your utmost to avoid conduct or statements that could undermine trust, and to prevent escalation of labor-management conflict.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s/Company’s Perspective)
When bid announcements, service contracts, and a practice of employment succession are combined, a legitimate expectation of renewal is readily recognized even for fixed-term employees. It is therefore important, at the initial contract stage, to clearly document the criteria for renewal and the exceptional circumstances under which renewal may be refused. In addition, if you intend to refuse renewal on the grounds of allegations of sexual harassment or conflict with the labor union, you should sufficiently secure objective evidence such as victim statements, the background to the union’s opposition, and records of violations of the Information and Communications Network Act. You should also document your internal reasoning as to whether these circumstances, in particular, seriously undermine the trust required for a managerial or supervisory position to the extent that performance of duties has become difficult.
In this type of case, the existence of a legitimate expectation of renewal and the reasonableness of the refusal to renew are examined step by step. It is therefore advisable to seek assistance from experts such as Labor Law Firm Law&, systematically organize the facts concerning the bid announcement, service contract, and overall labor-management relations, and then respond to the Labor Relations Commission proceedings.
2. Matters Decided
(a) Case Overview and Procedural History
(a) Whether the Employee’s Legitimate Expectation of Renewal of the Employment Contract Is Recognized
(1) The ordering agency’s bid announcement specified that, absent special circumstances, the current employees must be succeeded and their employment maintained; (2) the employer conformed to the service contract standards and thereby won the bid; and (3) the employer set the service contract period with the ordering agency at two years and succeeded to all employees. Considering these factors together, the Commission held that the employee’s legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract was recognized.
(b) Whether There Was a Reasonable Cause for Refusal to Renew the Employment Contract
(1) The employee held the position of general site manager; (2) with respect to the allegations of sexual harassment, the labor union opposed the succession of the employee’s employment, indicating conflict between the employee and the union; (3) although the investigative authorities concluded that there was no charge for sexual harassment due to insufficient evidence, the employer’s personnel discretion is not bound by that conclusion, and there were multiple alleged victims whose statements could not be easily dismissed; (4) there was no evidence supporting the employee’s assertion that the employer had promised to re-conclude the employment contract; and (5) due to conflict with the labor union, the employee received a summary order for the offense of violating the Information and Communications Network Act. Taking these factors together, the Commission held that, since the employer ultimately notified the employee of contract expiration after considering various matters, there was a reasonable cause for the refusal to renew the employment contract.
3. Summary of the Decision
(a) Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
(a) Whether the Employee’s Legitimate Expectation of Renewal of the Employment Contract Is Recognized
(1) The ordering agency’s bid announcement specified that, absent special circumstances, the current employees must be succeeded and their employment maintained; (2) the employer conformed to the service contract standards and thereby won the bid; and (3) the employer set the service contract period with the ordering agency at two years and succeeded to all employees. Considering these factors together, the Commission held that the employee’s legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract was recognized.
(b) Whether There Was a Reasonable Cause for Refusal to Renew the Employment Contract
(1) The employee held the position of general site manager; (2) with respect to the allegations of sexual harassment, the labor union opposed the succession of the employee’s employment, indicating conflict between the employee and the union; (3) although the investigative authorities concluded that there was no charge for sexual harassment due to insufficient evidence, the employer’s personnel discretion is not bound by that conclusion, and there were multiple alleged victims whose statements could not be easily dismissed; (4) there was no evidence supporting the employee’s assertion that the employer had promised to re-conclude the employment contract; and (5) due to conflict with the labor union, the employee received a summary order for the offense of violating the Information and Communications Network Act. Taking these factors together, the Commission held that, since the employer ultimately notified the employee of contract expiration after considering various matters, there was a reasonable cause for the refusal to renew the employment contract. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Case on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
- “Case on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’”
- “Case on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Non-Formation of Hiring Decision (Absence of Offer Letter)’” – Date of decision: – Case result: First-instance decision upheld
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, refusal to renew (general site manager · conflict over alleged sexual harassment), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, sexual harassment, conflict in labor-management relations, 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 Labor Law Firm Law&’s “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series.
※ You can view the previous article, “Case on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Existence of Dismissal (Notification by Text Message to Colleague)’,” in a new window.
※ A list of decisions relating to refusal to renew (general site manager · conflict over alleged sexual harassment) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions on Refusal to Renew (General Site Manager · Conflict over Alleged Sexual Harassment).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision in which the employer ultimately prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “refusal to renew (general site manager · conflict over alleged sexual harassment).”
Decision-making body: Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026Buhae93 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026.03.25 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of key issues: (a)
1. Legal Implications
This unfair dismissal case concerned whether the refusal to renew the fixed-term employment contract of a general site manager was justified, and was decided by the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission. It is noteworthy in that, although the Commission recognized the employee’s legitimate expectation of renewal, it still ruled in favor of the employer. This type of case is frequently consulted on at Labor Law Firm Law&, and is characterized by a complex interplay of the ordering agency’s bid announcement, the practice of employment succession, allegations of sexual harassment, and conflict with the labor union.
Ⅰ. Case Overview
The employer entered into a two-year service contract with the ordering agency and, in doing so, succeeded to all existing personnel and concluded employment contracts with the workers, including the fixed-term employee serving as general site manager. Upon the expiration of the contract term, the employer refused to renew the general site manager’s employment contract, citing various circumstances such as allegations of sexual harassment, conflict with the labor union, and a summary order for violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (the “Information and Communications Network Act”). The employee filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal, claiming that this refusal to renew constituted an unfair dismissal.
Ⅱ. Issues
The issue in this case was whether, “in circumstances where the employee’s legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract is recognized based on the bid announcement and the practice of employment succession, the employer’s refusal to renew the general site manager’s employment contract on the grounds of allegations of sexual harassment and conflict with the labor union, among others, was supported by a reasonable cause.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case noted that the ordering agency’s bid announcement explicitly stated that “absent special circumstances, existing employees shall be succeeded and their employment maintained,” that the employer had won the bid by conforming to the service contract standards of the ordering agency, and that the employer had in fact succeeded to all employees for the entire two-year contract period. Taking these circumstances together, the Commission held that the employee had a legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract.
At the same time, the Commission considered that the employee held the position of general site manager, bearing responsibility for the entire worksite; that, in relation to the allegations of sexual harassment, the labor union strongly opposed the succession of the employee’s employment, and that the conflict between the employee and the union had become so serious that it had become difficult for the employee to perform managerial and supervisory functions; that, although the criminal authorities had decided not to prosecute the sexual harassment allegations due to “insufficient evidence,” there were multiple alleged victims and their statements could not be lightly dismissed, so these circumstances continued to operate as factors undermining trust in the exercise of the employer’s personnel discretion; that there was no evidence supporting the employee’s assertion that the employer had promised to re-conclude the employment contract; and that, in the course of the conflict with the labor union, the employee had received a summary order for violation of the Information and Communications Network Act. In light of all these factors, the Commission determined that the employer’s notification of contract expiration, after considering the various circumstances, constituted a refusal to renew based on a “reasonable cause” that is acceptable under social norms.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Even fixed-term employees may be recognized as having a legitimate expectation of renewal where there are bid announcements, promises of employment succession, or a repeated practice of renewal. It is therefore important to keep and organize relevant documents and evidence of such practices on an ongoing basis. However, even if a legitimate expectation of renewal is recognized, in positions such as a general site manager that involve managerial and supervisory functions, accumulated factors such as allegations of sexual harassment, serious conflict with the labor union, and a criminal record may be evaluated as reasonable grounds for refusal to renew. Accordingly, in the course of performing your duties, you should do your utmost to avoid conduct or statements that could undermine trust, and to prevent escalation of labor-management conflict.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s/Company’s Perspective)
When bid announcements, service contracts, and a practice of employment succession are combined, a legitimate expectation of renewal is readily recognized even for fixed-term employees. It is therefore important, at the initial contract stage, to clearly document the criteria for renewal and the exceptional circumstances under which renewal may be refused. In addition, if you intend to refuse renewal on the grounds of allegations of sexual harassment or conflict with the labor union, you should sufficiently secure objective evidence such as victim statements, the background to the union’s opposition, and records of violations of the Information and Communications Network Act. You should also document your internal reasoning as to whether these circumstances, in particular, seriously undermine the trust required for a managerial or supervisory position to the extent that performance of duties has become difficult.
In this type of case, the existence of a legitimate expectation of renewal and the reasonableness of the refusal to renew are examined step by step. It is therefore advisable to seek assistance from experts such as Labor Law Firm Law&, systematically organize the facts concerning the bid announcement, service contract, and overall labor-management relations, and then respond to the Labor Relations Commission proceedings.
2. Matters Decided
(a) Case Overview and Procedural History
(a) Whether the Employee’s Legitimate Expectation of Renewal of the Employment Contract Is Recognized
(1) The ordering agency’s bid announcement specified that, absent special circumstances, the current employees must be succeeded and their employment maintained; (2) the employer conformed to the service contract standards and thereby won the bid; and (3) the employer set the service contract period with the ordering agency at two years and succeeded to all employees. Considering these factors together, the Commission held that the employee’s legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract was recognized.
(b) Whether There Was a Reasonable Cause for Refusal to Renew the Employment Contract
(1) The employee held the position of general site manager; (2) with respect to the allegations of sexual harassment, the labor union opposed the succession of the employee’s employment, indicating conflict between the employee and the union; (3) although the investigative authorities concluded that there was no charge for sexual harassment due to insufficient evidence, the employer’s personnel discretion is not bound by that conclusion, and there were multiple alleged victims whose statements could not be easily dismissed; (4) there was no evidence supporting the employee’s assertion that the employer had promised to re-conclude the employment contract; and (5) due to conflict with the labor union, the employee received a summary order for the offense of violating the Information and Communications Network Act. Taking these factors together, the Commission held that, since the employer ultimately notified the employee of contract expiration after considering various matters, there was a reasonable cause for the refusal to renew the employment contract.
3. Summary of the Decision
(a) Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
(a) Whether the Employee’s Legitimate Expectation of Renewal of the Employment Contract Is Recognized
(1) The ordering agency’s bid announcement specified that, absent special circumstances, the current employees must be succeeded and their employment maintained; (2) the employer conformed to the service contract standards and thereby won the bid; and (3) the employer set the service contract period with the ordering agency at two years and succeeded to all employees. Considering these factors together, the Commission held that the employee’s legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract was recognized.
(b) Whether There Was a Reasonable Cause for Refusal to Renew the Employment Contract
(1) The employee held the position of general site manager; (2) with respect to the allegations of sexual harassment, the labor union opposed the succession of the employee’s employment, indicating conflict between the employee and the union; (3) although the investigative authorities concluded that there was no charge for sexual harassment due to insufficient evidence, the employer’s personnel discretion is not bound by that conclusion, and there were multiple alleged victims whose statements could not be easily dismissed; (4) there was no evidence supporting the employee’s assertion that the employer had promised to re-conclude the employment contract; and (5) due to conflict with the labor union, the employee received a summary order for the offense of violating the Information and Communications Network Act. Taking these factors together, the Commission held that, since the employer ultimately notified the employee of contract expiration after considering various matters, there was a reasonable cause for the refusal to renew the employment contract. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Case on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
- “Case on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’”
- “Case on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Non-Formation of Hiring Decision (Absence of Offer Letter)’” – Date of decision: – Case result: First-instance decision upheld
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, refusal to renew (general site manager · conflict over alleged sexual harassment), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, sexual harassment, conflict in labor-management relations, 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 Labor Law Firm Law&’s “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series.
※ You can view the previous article, “Case on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Existence of Dismissal (Notification by Text Message to Colleague)’,” in a new window.
※ A list of decisions relating to refusal to renew (general site manager · conflict over alleged sexual harassment) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions on Refusal to Renew (General Site Manager · Conflict over Alleged Sexual Harassment).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
