[Case Information] This case is a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “non-existence of legitimate expectation of renewal (practice of contract expiry).” Decision body: Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026Buhae556 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal 2026-07-28 · Case result: Dismissed Summary of key issue: As there were no provisions in the employment contract or personnel regulations regarding any obligation, requirements, or procedures for contract renewal, and as, according to the status of contract renewals for employees hired by the company over the past three years, cases of expiry upon the end of the term outnumbered renewal cases, it was difficult to find that a relationship of trust had been formed that the employment contract would be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions. Accordingly, it was held that no legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract existed. 1. Legal Implications Ⅰ. Case Overview In this case, a fixed-term employee filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal, claiming unfair dismissal after the employment contract was not renewed upon expiry. The Busan Regional Labor Relations Commission focused its review on whether a legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract existed, and ultimately ruled 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 a legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract can be recognized for the employee “based solely on the company’s past practices of renewal and non-renewal, in circumstances where there are no provisions in the employment contract or personnel regulations imposing an obligation to renew or setting out renewal procedures.” Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning The panel in this case noted that there were no provisions anywhere in the employment contract or personnel regulations regarding any obligation to renew, or the requirements or procedures for renewal; that, looking at the company’s operation of fixed-term contracts over the past three years, there were more cases in which contracts ended upon expiry than cases of renewal; and that, in light of these circumstances as a whole, it was difficult to find that a relationship of trust had been formed that the contract would necessarily be renewed when certain conditions were satisfied. Accordingly, the panel determined that it was difficult to recognize that the employee had a legitimate expectation regarding renewal of the employment contract, i.e., a legitimate expectation of renewal. In conclusion, the panel held that “the dismissal in this case” should be viewed as a natural termination due to the expiry of the contract term, and that the refusal to renew the employment contract could not be regarded as an unfair dismissal. Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective) Employees should be aware that a legitimate expectation of renewal is not recognized merely because “some colleagues around you were renewed.” It is important to objectively prove, through the employment contract, rules of employment, HR guidelines, etc., whether there are specific criteria and procedures for renewal, and whether, in the company’s actual operation, renewals have been made on an exceptional and selective basis, or, instead, contracts have in practice been automatically renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions. In particular, if, in recent years, a significant proportion of comparable employees have left due to contract expiry, employees should bear in mind that a claim of legitimate expectation of renewal is unlikely to be accepted by the Labor Relations Commission. Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective) From the employer’s perspective, when operating fixed-term employment contracts, it is advisable to clearly stipulate in the employment contract the contract period and a clause stating that the contract “automatically terminates upon expiry of the term,” and to avoid ambiguous expressions in the rules of employment or personnel regulations that could be misunderstood as imposing an obligation to renew. In actual HR operations, while renewals may be made when necessary, it is important to ensure that there are also consistent cases of termination upon contract expiry, so that a practice does not form under which “contracts are renewed as a matter of course absent special circumstances.” In addition, retaining materials showing that renewal decisions have been made based on periodic evaluations or manpower needs will be very helpful in later explaining to the Labor Relations Commission that renewal was within the employer’s discretionary decision-making authority. To prevail in this type of fixed-term employment and redundancy dispute, it is crucial to accurately understand the Supreme Court’s legal principles on unfair dismissal and legitimate expectation of renewal, and to design and manage contract language and HR practices in advance so that they conform to those principles. (ⓒ2026 copyright. Labor Attorney Moon Young-seop, Labor Law Firm Law&. Unauthorized reproduction and redistribution are prohibited.) 2. Matters Decided A. Case Overview and Procedural History As there were no provisions in the employment contract or personnel regulations regarding any obligation, requirements, or procedures for contract renewal, and as, according to the status of contract renewals for employees hired by the company over the past three years, cases of expiry upon the end of the term outnumbered renewal cases, it was difficult to find that a relationship of trust had been formed that the employment contract would be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions. Accordingly, it was held that no legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract existed. 3. Summary of the Decision A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning As there were no provisions in the employment contract or personnel regulations regarding any obligation, requirements, or procedures for contract renewal, and as, according to the status of contract renewals for employees hired by the company over the past three years, cases of expiry upon the end of the term outnumbered renewal cases, it was difficult to find that a relationship of trust had been formed that the employment contract would be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions. Accordingly, it was held that no legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract existed. / [See More Related Decisions] - “‘Non-Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision” – Date of decision: – Case result: First-instance decision upheld - “‘Disciplinary Sanction Level (Unauthorized Removal of Confidential Information)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision” - “‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision” [Tags] Unfair dismissal, non-existence of legitimate expectation of renewal (practice of contract expiry), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, 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, “‘Disciplinary Sanction Level (Unauthorized Removal of Confidential Information)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window. ※ The list of decisions related to non-existence of legitimate expectation of renewal (practice of contract expiry) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions Related to Non-Existence of Legitimate Expectation of Renewal (Practice of Contract Expiry).” ※ Korean version of this case: Korean article