[Case Information] This case is a decision in which the employee prevailed (full acceptance) on the issue of “existence of dismissal (text messages · encouragement to report to work).” Decision body: Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026Buhae1873 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal 2026-07-31 · Outcome: Fully upheld Summary of key issues: a. 1. Legal Implications Ⅰ. Overview of the Case This case concerns proceedings before the Labor Relations Commission where the issue was whether there had been an unfair dismissal in circumstances where the employee stopped reporting to work after exchanging text messages and phone calls with the employer. The employee continued to express an intention to remain employed and inquired whether they could report to work the following day. The employee then filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal, asserting that, in the course of the employer’s subsequent response, a de facto dismissal had occurred. The Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission examined not only whether there had been a dismissal, but also the just cause for dismissal and compliance with procedural requirements, and rendered a decision fully upholding the employee’s claim. Ⅱ. Issues in Dispute The issue in this case is “whether, in circumstances where the employee’s reporting to work ceased in the course of text message and telephone communications, the employer’s conduct can be regarded as a dismissal, and if so, whether the employer satisfied the requirement of just cause for dismissal and the written notice procedure under the Labor Standards Act.” Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning The panel in this case found that there had been a unilateral dismissal by the employer, based on the following: the employee clearly expressed an intention to continue working by sending a text message asking whether they could report to work the next day; immediately thereafter, following a phone call with Team Leader Kim, the employee stopped reporting to work from the next day; the employer, without checking or encouraging the employee’s attendance, paid only one day’s wages and in effect terminated the employment relationship; and only when the employee later indicated an intention to take legal action did the employer send a text message asserting that there had been no dismissal and purporting to encourage the employee to return to work. In particular, the Labor Relations Commission viewed the subsequent text message encouraging the employee to report to work as a formalistic response conscious of the dispute, rather than a genuine intention to continue the employment relationship. Furthermore, the Commission held that the employer had failed to meet the written notice requirement under Article 27 of the Labor Standards Act, as the employer did not provide written notice of the reason for dismissal and the timing of dismissal, and that there was therefore a serious procedural defect. The Commission held that the dismissal in this case constituted an unfair dismissal. Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective) From the employee’s perspective, this case clearly illustrates the importance of expressly stating one’s “intention to continue working” in text messages, KakaoTalk messages, and recorded calls. Even where the employer blocks the employee from reporting to work or ceases to encourage attendance without issuing a separate written notice of dismissal, it may still be determined that a dismissal has in fact occurred. Accordingly, when preparing an application for remedy before the Labor Relations Commission, employees should systematically organize such circumstantial evidence. Employees should also bear in mind that even if the employer later asserts that “there was no dismissal” and encourages the employee to return to work, the existence of a dismissal will be determined based on the prior sequence of events and the overall context. Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective) From the employer’s perspective, if there is an intention to terminate the employment relationship, it must be reaffirmed that, above all, the employer is required under Article 27 of the Labor Standards Act to clearly deliver a written document stating the reason for dismissal and the timing of dismissal. The practice of effectively blocking attendance or stopping wage payments by means of text messages or oral notifications alone, and then belatedly retracting this by claiming “it was not a dismissal” once a dispute arises, carries a very high risk of being found to constitute an unfair dismissal by the Labor Relations Commission. Accordingly, in HR and labor management practice, it is important to clearly distinguish between dismissal, resignation, and termination by mutual agreement, and to establish a system in which all procedures are documented. Where necessary, employers should obtain prior risk assessments and advice from specialized institutions such as Labor Law Firm Law&. 2. Matters Decided a. Overview of the Case and Procedural History a. Whether a dismissal occurred (1) The employee sent a text message asking whether they could report to work the next day, indicating an intention to continue working; (2) After the phone call with Team Leader Kim, the employee did not report to work the following day; (3) The employer did not check or encourage the employee’s attendance and paid only one day’s wages; (4) When the employee sent a text message indicating an intention to take legal action, the employer attempted to call and then sent a text message asserting that it was not a dismissal and purporting to encourage the employee to report to work. In light of these circumstances, the Commission found that a dismissal had occurred and that the employer’s subsequent encouragement to report to work could not be regarded as reflecting a genuine intention. b. Whether item a. was justified (reason and procedure) The employer did not provide written notice of the reason and timing … 3. Summary of the Decision a. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning a. Whether a dismissal occurred (1) The employee sent a text message asking whether they could report to work the next day, indicating an intention to continue working; (2) After the phone call with Team Leader Kim, the employee did not report to work the following day; (3) The employer did not check or encourage the employee’s attendance and paid only one day’s wages; (4) When the employee sent a text message indicating an intention to take legal action, the employer attempted to call and then sent a text message asserting that it was not a dismissal and purporting to encourage the employee to report to work. In light of these circumstances, the Commission found that a dismissal had occurred and that the employer’s subsequent encouragement to report to work could not be regarded as reflecting a genuine intention. b. Whether item a. was justified (reason and procedure) The employer did not provide written notice of the reason and timing … / [See More Related Decisions] - “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Concerning Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)” - “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Concerning Expression of Intent to Resign (Misunderstanding of Store Manager’s Remark)” - “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Concerning Procedural Defect (Failure to Implement Disciplinary Procedure)” [Tags] Unfair dismissal, existence of dismissal (text messages · encouragement to report to work), others, Labor Law Firm Law&, large labor law firm, labor law firm in Samseong-dong, labor law firm at Samseong Station, labor law firm in Gangnam ※ This article is part of the “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series by Labor Law Firm Law&. ※ You can view the previous article, “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Concerning Expression of Intent to Resign (Misunderstanding of Store Manager’s Remark),” in a new window. ※ The list of decisions concerning existence of dismissal (text messages · encouragement to report to work) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions Concerning Existence of Dismissal (Text Messages · Encouragement to Report to Work).” ※ Korean version of this case: Korean article