This case concerns a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of the “right to terminate during probation (evaluation and interview procedures).” [Case Information] This case is a precedent in which the employer ultimately prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of the “right to terminate during probation (evaluation and interview procedures).” Decision body: Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission, 2026BuHae1847 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal Decision date: 2026-07-30 · Case result: Dismissed Key issue summary: … It was held that the employer could terminate the employment contract before the expiry of the probationary (trial) period. 1. Legal Implications Ⅰ. Case Overview In this case, the employer terminated the employment contract early during the probationary (trial) period on the basis of the results of a probationary evaluation. The employee claimed that this constituted an unfair dismissal and filed an application for remedy with the Labor Relations Commission. The Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission comprehensively reviewed the legal nature of the probationary contract, the way the probationary evaluation was administered, and the procedures for interviews and written notification, and ultimately found in favor of the employer, dismissing the employee’s application for remedy for unfair dismissal. Ⅱ. Summary of Issues The issue in this case is whether the employer’s early termination of the employment contract, based on the results of a probationary (trial) evaluation while time remained on the probationary contract, constitutes an unfair dismissal, and in particular, whether the grounds and procedures for such termination were justifiable. Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning The decision panel in this case found that it was difficult to view the employer’s probationary evaluation as having been conducted in a merely formal or arbitrary manner, or as having been targeted unfavorably at a specific employee; that there was no objective evidence to support the employee’s allegations of unfair evaluation or discriminatory administration; and that, although neither the rules of employment nor the probationary evaluation confirmation form contained any provision requiring the employer, when terminating the employment contract based on the probationary evaluation, to follow disciplinary procedures (such as granting an opportunity to explain or issuing stepwise warnings), the employer nonetheless held two interviews to request improvement and fulfilled its obligation of written notification. In light of these circumstances, the Commission held that the dismissal in this case constituted an exercise of the employer’s reserved right to terminate during the probationary (trial) period, fell within the bounds acceptable under social norms, and was procedurally free from any particular illegality, and was therefore justified. Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective) From the employee’s perspective, although one is not completely unprotected from unfair dismissal during the probationary period, the employer’s right to terminate is recognized more broadly than in the case of ordinary dismissal. Accordingly, if you believe that there is unfair evaluation or discrimination in the course of the probationary evaluation, it is important to consistently secure objective materials such as specific points of criticism, dates and times of interviews, statements made, and email or messenger records. You should also review in advance the rules of employment and documents related to the probationary evaluation (probationary evaluation confirmation forms, notices, etc.) and continuously check whether the company is complying with the evaluation criteria and procedures it has promised. Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s/Company’s Perspective) From the employer’s side, even though the probationary (trial) system has a different legal character from ordinary disciplinary dismissal, it is necessary to document the evaluation criteria and process so that they appear objective and reasonable. Keeping records such as probationary evaluation forms, specific work-related criticisms, requests for improvement, and interview logs will be of great help in proving the legitimacy of the exercise of the right to terminate during probation before the Labor Relations Commission. In addition, it is advisable to clearly stipulate in the rules of employment, employment contracts, and probationary evaluation confirmation forms the purpose of the probationary period, the evaluation items, and the possibility and procedures for termination of the employment contract based on the evaluation, and in actual operation to provide at least a minimal opportunity to explain (interviews, warnings, feedback), so that the action is not mistaken for an “arbitrary or retaliatory dismissal.” In this type of case, for the Labor Relations Commission to recognize the legitimacy of the exercise of the right to terminate during probation, it must be possible to prove that the probationary system was operated in accordance with reasonable personnel and labor management criteria and procedures. It is therefore advisable to check this in advance through consultation with experts such as Labor Law Firm Law&. 2. Matters Determined a. Case Overview and Procedural History … It was held that the employer could terminate the employment contract before the expiry of the probationary (trial) period. c. Justification of the Termination of the Employment Contract (Grounds and Procedure) It was found to be difficult to regard the employer’s probationary evaluation as having been conducted in a merely formal or arbitrary manner, or as having been targeted solely at the employee; there was no objective evidence to support the employee’s allegations; and although neither the rules of employment nor the probationary evaluation confirmation form contained any provision requiring, when terminating the employment contract based on the probationary evaluation, the granting of an opportunity to explain equivalent to disciplinary procedures or the following of stepwise warning procedures, the employer nonetheless held two interviews with the employee to request improvement and fulfilled its obligation of written notification, and the termination was therefore held to be justified. 3. Summary of Decision a. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning … It was held that the employer could terminate the employment contract before the expiry of the probationary (trial) period. c. Justification of the Termination of the Employment Contract (Grounds and Procedure) It was found to be difficult to regard the employer’s probationary evaluation as having been conducted in a merely formal or arbitrary manner, or as having been targeted solely at the employee; there was no objective evidence to support the employee’s allegations; and although neither the rules of employment nor the probationary evaluation confirmation form contained any provision requiring, when terminating the employment contract based on the probationary evaluation, the granting of an opportunity to explain equivalent to disciplinary procedures or the following of stepwise warning procedures, the employer nonetheless held two interviews with the employee to request improvement and fulfilled its obligation of written notification, and the termination was therefore held to be justified. / [See More Related Decisions] - “Unfair Dismissal Case Concerning ‘Dismissal of Application (Non-Appearance at Hearing)’” – Decision date: - Case result: Dismissed - “Unfair Dismissal Case Concerning ‘Excessive Disciplinary Measure (Disciplinary Action for Remarks Made 4 Years and 4 Months Earlier)’” - “Unfair Dismissal Case Concerning ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’” [Tags] Unfair dismissal, right to terminate during probation (evaluation and interview procedures), dismissal during trial period, 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 Case Concerning ‘Excessive Disciplinary Measure (Disciplinary Action for Remarks Made 4 Years and 4 Months Earlier)’,” in a new window. ※ You can view the list of decisions related to the right to terminate during probation (evaluation and interview procedures) on the “List of Decisions Related to the Right to Terminate During Probation (Evaluation and Interview Procedures)” page. ※ Korean version of this case: Korean article