This case is a precedent in which the proceedings were terminated by dismissal on procedural grounds, with the key issue being “dismissal (failure to comply with correction order – text message sent).” [Case Information] This case is a precedent in which the proceedings were concluded by a procedural dismissal on the issue of “dismissal (failure to comply with correction order – text message sent).” Adjudicating body: Gyeongnam Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026Buhae520 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal 2026-07-27 · Case type: Dismissal (gakha) Summary of key issues: In light of the facts that the worker did not express any position on multiple official letters sent by the Commission requesting correction of the grounds for the application and submission of a statement of reasons, and that on 13 July 2026 the worker sent a text message to the office number of the investigator in charge at the Commission to the effect of “Do not contact me any further,” it was determined that the worker not only failed to comply with the correction orders on more than two occasions, but also had abandoned the intention to pursue the remedy application. Accordingly, this was deemed to fall under the Commis… 1. Legal Implications Ⅰ. Case Overview In this case, the worker filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission seeking a remedy for unfair dismissal. However, the application was dismissed because the worker failed to respond to several correction orders and requests to submit a statement of reasons during the course of the proceedings. Taking into account, among other things, that the worker sent a text message to the investigator in charge stating in substance “Do not contact me any further,” the Commission concluded that the worker had voluntarily abandoned the intention to pursue the unfair dismissal remedy application and terminated the proceedings without a substantive hearing. Ⅱ. Summary of Issues The issue in this case is whether, in an application for remedy for unfair dismissal, the remedy procedure can still be maintained where the worker repeatedly fails to respond to the Labor Relations Commission’s correction orders and guidance, and even goes so far as to express an intention of “Do not contact me any further.” Ⅲ. Key Points of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision The adjudicating panel in this case found that the worker had not expressed any position on multiple official letters sent by the Labor Relations Commission requesting correction of the grounds for the application and submission of a statement of reasons; that the worker sent a text message to the office number of the investigator in charge stating in substance “Do not contact me any further”; and that, as a result, the worker did not respond at all to correction orders that were issued more than twice. In light of these circumstances, the panel determined that the worker no longer had any intention to maintain the application for remedy for unfair dismissal. The panel held that this case falls under the grounds for dismissal (gakha) set out in Article 60(1) subparagraphs 2 and 7 of the Labor Relations Commission Rules, namely “failure to comply with a correction order” and “abandonment of the intention to pursue the remedy application.” Accordingly, it ruled that the worker’s application for remedy for unfair dismissal should be dismissed at a stage prior to any determination on the legitimacy of the dismissal itself. Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective) If a worker files an application with the Labor Relations Commission claiming unfair dismissal, the worker must faithfully respond within the prescribed deadlines to any correction orders, guidance on submitting a statement of reasons, and requests for confirmation of facts sent by the Commission. Under the Labor Relations Commission Rules, if the worker fails to comply with a correction order on more than two occasions, or expresses an intention not to proceed with the procedure any further, the application itself may be dismissed before the unfairness of the dismissal is even examined. In particular, if the worker responds emotionally by sending a text message such as “Do not contact me,” there is a high risk that this will be interpreted as abandonment of the remedy application, regardless of the worker’s actual intent. Therefore, any decision on whether to continue with the procedure should be made cautiously after充分 consulting with experts such as Labor Law Firm Law&. Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective) From the employer’s standpoint, when a worker files an application for remedy for unfair dismissal, the employer should faithfully comply with the Labor Relations Commission’s requests for submission of materials and opinions, while also carefully monitoring whether the worker is properly fulfilling the application requirements and procedural obligations. If the worker repeatedly fails to comply with correction orders or there are clear indications that the worker is expressly refusing to proceed with the procedure, it is advisable to review whether the situation falls under the grounds for dismissal (gakha) set out in Article 60 of the Labor Relations Commission Rules and to formulate a procedural strategy accordingly. However, if the company itself unilaterally cuts off communication with the worker or refuses to cooperate in confirming the facts, the employer’s credibility may be undermined. The employer should therefore remain fully cooperative and sincere throughout the official procedures before the Labor Relations Commission. Such dismissal (gakha) precedents, separate and apart from any determination on the substantive legitimacy of the dismissal itself, demonstrate how important it is to understand and respond correctly to the procedural rules of the Labor Relations Commission. To obtain effective relief in an unfair dismissal dispute, it is advisable at the initial stage to seek assistance from experts such as Labor Law Firm Law& and carefully review the application requirements and correction procedures. 2. Matters Adjudicated A. Case Overview and Procedural History In light of the facts that the worker did not express any position on multiple official letters sent by the Commission requesting correction of the grounds for the application and submission of a statement of reasons, and that on 13 July 2026 the worker sent a text message to the office number of the investigator in charge at the Commission to the effect of “Do not contact me any further,” it is determined that the worker not only failed to comply with the correction orders on more than two occasions, but also abandoned the intention to pursue the remedy application. Accordingly, this falls under the grounds for dismissal (gakha) set out in Article 60(1) subparagraphs 2 and 7 of the Labor Relations Commission Rules. 3. Gist of the Decision A. Key Points of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision In light of the facts that the worker did not express any position on multiple official letters sent by the Commission requesting correction of the grounds for the application and submission of a statement of reasons, and that on 13 July 2026 the worker sent a text message to the office number of the investigator in charge at the Commission to the effect of “Do not contact me any further,” it is determined that the worker not only failed to comply with the correction orders on more than two occasions, but also abandoned the intention to pursue the remedy application. Accordingly, this falls under the grounds for dismissal (gakha) set out in Article 60(1) subparagraphs 2 and 7 of the Labor Relations Commission Rules. / [See More Related Decisions] - “Dismissal (Failure to Appear at Hearing)” Unfair Dismissal Decision – Date of decision: – Case type: Dismissal (gakha) - “Retention of Dismissal Notice (Text Message)” Unfair Dismissal Decision - “Standing to Sue (Expiration of Fixed-Term Contract for Dispatched Worker)” Unfair Dismissal Decision [Tags] Unfair dismissal, dismissal (failure to comply with correction order – text message sent), 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, “‘Retention of Dismissal Notice (Text Message)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window. ※ The list of decisions related to dismissal (failure to comply with correction order – text message sent) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions on Dismissal (Failure to Comply with Correction Order – Text Message Sent).” ※ Korean version of this case: Korean article