[Case Information] This case is a decision in which the employee prevailed in full on the issue of “relief interest (resignation of operating room head nurse).” Decision Committee: Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026Buhae566 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal Decision date: 2026-07-30 · Case result: Fully upheld Summary of key issues: a. 1. Legal Implications Ⅰ. Case Overview In this case, an employee working as the head nurse of the operating room at a hospital filed an application for remedy with the Labor Relations Commission, claiming that a personnel reassignment that changed her position and reduced her wages, including her position allowance, constituted an unfair personnel measure equivalent to unfair dismissal. Subsequently, on 15 June 2026, the employee submitted a resignation letter and left the hospital. Nevertheless, the Labor Relations Commission proceeded with its review focusing, as in unfair dismissal and redundancy dismissal cases, on whether there remained any relief interest with respect to the wage component. Ⅱ. Summary of Issues The issue in this case is: “Whether relief interest continues to exist for an employee to maintain an application for remedy before the Labor Relations Commission regarding the reduction in wages, including position allowance, caused by a personnel reassignment, even where the employee has voluntarily resigned after the reassignment, making reinstatement to the original position impossible.” The panel in this case noted that the employee had already submitted a resignation letter, making reinstatement to her original position as operating room head nurse no longer feasible; that, separately from this, the parties were still in dispute over whether the reduced wages actually incurred after the personnel reassignment should be paid; and that, in light of the recent en banc Supreme Court precedent recognizing an independent relief interest in orders to pay wage equivalents in cases involving personnel measures such as unfair dismissal, unfair transfer, and suspension, it would be inappropriate to dismiss the entire application for remedy solely on the ground that the employment relationship had ended. Rather, to the extent that there remains an interest in obtaining an order to pay the reduced wage portion arising after the personnel reassignment, relief interest should be deemed to continue to exist. On this basis, the panel held that relief interest existed for the application for remedy in this case. The dismissal disposition in this case was found to be unfair in that it should not have been entirely dismissed merely because the employee had already resigned and reinstatement was impossible; the portion concerning the wage reduction should have been recognized as having an independent relief interest. Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective) Even if an employee voluntarily resigns while contesting an unfair dismissal or unfair personnel reassignment, it should be borne in mind that there may still be room to contest, through the Labor Relations Commission’s remedy procedures, the reduced wage portion arising after the personnel measure, or wage equivalents for the period of dismissal or suspension. However, where the employment contract term has already expired before the application for remedy is filed, or where the employment relationship has already terminated from the outset due to reaching the mandatory retirement age, relief interest itself may be denied under Supreme Court precedent and Labor Relations Commission rules. Accordingly, it is advisable to promptly file an application for remedy without missing the appropriate timing, in consultation with experts such as Labor Law Firm Law&. Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective) From the employer’s standpoint, it is important not to assume simplistically that “the Labor Relations Commission case automatically ends because the employee has resigned.” You must formulate your response strategy on the premise that there may still be risks of a remedy order and enforcement penalty regarding wage disadvantages already incurred due to personnel measures such as reassignment, demotion, or suspension. In particular, the work rules should clearly define the concepts, requirements, and procedures for demotion, transfer, removal from position, etc., as well as the standards for changes in the wage system. Employers should also organize in advance the reasons and supporting materials for personnel reassignments so that they can substantiate their legitimacy at later stages before the Labor Relations Commission or the courts. 2. Matters Decided a. Case Overview and Procedural History a. Whether there is relief interest in this application for remedy Although the employee in this case submitted a resignation letter dated 15 June 2026 and left the hospital, making reinstatement to her original position as operating room head nurse impossible, relief interest in obtaining an order for payment remains with respect to the reduced wage portion, including position allowance, from the time of the personnel reassignment. Therefore, relief interest exists in this application for remedy. b. Whether the personnel reassignment in this case constitutes a demotion The work rules and other regulations do not provide for “demotion,” there was no change in job grade as a result of the personnel reassignment, and no misconduct committed by the employee in this case has been established. Therefore, this personnel reas… 3. Gist of the Decision a. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Findings a. Whether there is relief interest in this application for remedy Although the employee in this case submitted a resignation letter dated 15 June 2026 and left the hospital, making reinstatement to her original position as operating room head nurse impossible, relief interest in obtaining an order for payment remains with respect to the reduced wage portion, including position allowance, from the time of the personnel reassignment. Therefore, relief interest exists in this application for remedy. b. Whether the personnel reassignment in this case constitutes a demotion The work rules and other regulations do not provide for “demotion,” there was no change in job grade as a result of the personnel reassignment, and no misconduct committed by the employee in this case has been established. Therefore, this personnel reas… / [See More Related Decisions] - “‘Dismissal of Application (Non-Appearance at Hearing)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision” – Decision date: - Case result: Dismissal of application - “‘Non-Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision” – Decision date: - Case result: First-instance decision upheld - “‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision” [Tags] Unfair dismissal, relief interest (resignation of operating room head nurse), performance evaluation · poor performance, 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, “‘Refusal of Resignation upon Employer’s Recommendation (Use of Annual Leave)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window. ※ A list of decisions related to relief interest (resignation of operating room head nurse) can be found in the “List of Decisions Related to Relief Interest (Resignation of Operating Room Head Nurse).” ※ Korean version of this case: Korean article