[Case Information] This case is a decision in which the employee prevailed (full acceptance) on the issue of “non-existence of grounds for dismissal (one day of unauthorised absence).” Decision Committee: Jeju Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026Buhae122 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal 2026-07-02 · Case outcome: Full acceptance Summary of key issues: A. Legitimacy of the dismissal A notice of termination of employment issued to an employee pursuant to a written confirmation stating that “the employment contract will be terminated in the event of poor attendance” constitutes a dismissal under the Labor Standards Act, regardless of its title or form, as it unilaterally terminates the employment relationship against the employee’s will. 1. Legal Implications This unfair dismissal case was handled by the Jeju Regional Labor Relations Commission, where the employee applied for relief and obtained a decision of full acceptance. Although the employee had signed a written confirmation stating that the employment contract would be terminated in the event of poor attendance, the employer’s action in notifying termination of the employment contract on the ground of a single day of unauthorised absence became the issue. This is a typical type of unfair dismissal dispute that requires the assistance of experts such as Labor Law Firm Law&. Ⅰ. Case Overview The employer obtained from the employee a written confirmation stating that “the employment contract will be terminated in the event of poor attendance,” and then notified the employee of termination of the employment contract on the ground of one day of unauthorised absence. Even though the employee explained the reason for the unauthorised absence, the dismissal was maintained. The employee therefore claimed that the dismissal was unfair and filed an application for remedy with the Labor Relations Commission. Ⅱ. Issues The issue in this case is whether, where the employee has signed a written confirmation that the employment contract will be terminated in the event of poor attendance, a notice of termination of the employment contract based on one day of unauthorised absence constitutes a dismissal, and furthermore, whether such dismissal is supported by “just cause” according to social norms. Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision The panel in this case held that, even if the employer used the form of a “notice of termination of employment contract” based on the written confirmation, the employer unilaterally terminated the employment relationship against the employee’s will, and therefore, regardless of its title or form, this constitutes a dismissal under the Labor Standards Act. Considering that the direct ground for dismissal was only one day of unauthorised absence, that the employee had explained the reason for that absence, and that one day of unauthorised absence was not stipulated as a formal ground for dismissal in the employment contract, the panel found that it was difficult to conclude that there was a reason attributable to the employee to such an extent that, according to social norms, the employment relationship could not be maintained, and that the “just cause” required under Article 23 of the Labor Standards Act was not established. Accordingly, the dismissal was held to be unfair. Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective) From the employee’s perspective, even if you have signed documents such as a “memorandum,” “confirmation,” or “consent to termination of employment in the event of poor attendance,” if the employer arbitrarily proceeds to dismiss you on that basis, you should bear in mind that you can challenge the dismissal as unfair before the Labor Relations Commission. In particular, where a dispute is anticipated over attendance issues such as unauthorised absence or tardiness, it is important to record the reasons for absence as concretely as possible and preserve them in objective forms such as text messages, messenger records, or emails, as these will serve as key defensive materials in subsequent unfair dismissal remedy procedures. Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company Perspective) From the employer’s perspective, it must be clearly recognised that broad written confirmations such as “you will be dismissed in the event of poor attendance” or automatic resignation clauses do not, by themselves, automatically establish the legitimacy of a dismissal. At the actual stage of dismissal, you should carefully assess, in the aggregate, the number of days of unauthorised absence, its repetitiveness, the impact on business operations, and the content of the employee’s explanation, and prudently determine whether there is a reason attributable to the employee to such an extent that, according to social norms, the employment relationship cannot be continued. You should also set the level of disciplinary action so that it is consistent with the grounds for dismissal stipulated in the rules of employment and the employment contract. To prevent this type of unfair dismissal dispute, employers should specifically refine the grounds for dismissal in the rules of employment and employment contracts, operate a phased disciplinary process for poor attendance (such as warnings, cautions, and pay cuts), and build a human resources and labor management system in which dismissal is used only as a last resort. 2. Matters Decided A. Case Overview and Procedural History A. Legitimacy of the dismissal A notice of termination of employment issued to an employee pursuant to a written confirmation stating that the employment contract will be terminated in the event of poor attendance constitutes a dismissal, regardless of its title or form, as it unilaterally terminates the employment relationship against the employee’s will. The direct ground for dismissal was merely one day of unauthorised absence, the employee has explained the reason for that absence, and one day of unauthorised absence is not stipulated as a ground for dismissal in the employment contract. In light of these circumstances, it is difficult to find that there is a reason attributable to the employee to such an extent that, according to social norms, the employment relationship cannot be maintained. Furthermore, the employer’s rules of employment ... 3. Summary of the Decision A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning A. Legitimacy of the dismissal A notice of termination of employment issued to an employee pursuant to a written confirmation stating that the employment contract will be terminated in the event of poor attendance constitutes a dismissal, regardless of its title or form, as it unilaterally terminates the employment relationship against the employee’s will. The direct ground for dismissal was merely one day of unauthorised absence, the employee has explained the reason for that absence, and one day of unauthorised absence is not stipulated as a ground for dismissal in the employment contract. In light of these circumstances, it is difficult to find that there is a reason attributable to the employee to such an extent that, according to social norms, the employment relationship cannot be maintained. Furthermore, the employer’s rules of employment ... / [More Related Decisions] - ‘Unfair Dismissal Decision on “Standing to Sue (Reconstruction Apartment Residents’ Representative Council)”’ - ‘Unfair Dismissal Decision on “Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)”’ - ‘Unfair Dismissal Decision on “Dismissal (Non-Appearance at Hearing)”’ – Date of decision: – Case number: Dismissal [Tags] Unfair dismissal, non-existence of grounds for dismissal (one day of unauthorised absence), unauthorised absence, disciplinary dismissal, 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, “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Standing to Sue (Reconstruction Apartment Residents’ Representative Council)’,” in a new window. ※ The list of decisions related to non-existence of grounds for dismissal (one day of unauthorised absence) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions Related to Non-Existence of Grounds for Dismissal (One Day of Unauthorised Absence).” ※ Korean version of this case: Korean article