This case concerns an unfair dismissal decision in which the employer ultimately prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “formation of conditional hiring (no agreement on start date).” Adjudicating Body: Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026Buhae738 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal 2026-09-22 · Case result: Dismissed Key Issue Summary: The worker argued that a conditional hiring relationship had been formed because the employer had coordinated a possible start date. However, (i) although it was acknowledged that the employer asked the worker about possible start dates during the interview process, there was no confirmation that the parties had reached a meeting of the minds or an agreement on a specific start date; (ii) the worker did not submit the employment medical examination documents, bank account copy, etc., which are ordinarily required to be submitted by a confirmed hire, and … 1. Legal Implications Ⅰ. Case Overview In this unfair dismissal case, a job applicant claimed that a conditional hiring relationship had been formed merely because the applicant and the company exchanged messages about possible start dates during the interview process. On that basis, the applicant filed an application for remedy for unfair dismissal with the Labor Relations Commission. The Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission examined, in particular, whether a conditional hiring relationship had been formed, taking into account the text messages submitted, whether any documents had been requested or submitted, whether an employment contract had been executed, and other surrounding circumstances. Ⅱ. Summary of Issues The key issue in this case is: “Whether a conditional hiring relationship can be deemed to have been formed solely on the basis of questions and answers about possible start dates during the interview process, such that the company’s subsequent decision not to proceed with the hiring can be regarded as unfair dismissal.” In other words, the question was whether the Labor Relations Commission can recognize unfair dismissal even in the absence of a concrete agreement on a start date or completion of the employer’s hiring confirmation procedures. Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Findings The panel in this case acknowledged that the employer had asked about possible start dates during the interview process. However, it found that there was no evidence indicating that the parties had reached a meeting of the minds regarding a specific start date. It further noted that the worker had never been asked to submit documents such as the results of an employment medical examination or a copy of a bank account, which are ordinarily required from a candidate whose hiring has been confirmed, and that there was no evidence that the parties had prepared or executed an employment contract. In light of these circumstances, the panel held that it was difficult to find that a conditional hiring relationship had been formed. The panel therefore concluded that the employer’s action in this case was merely a decision not to proceed with hiring at a stage where no employment contract relationship had yet been formed, and thus did not constitute unfair dismissal. Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective) From the worker’s perspective, even if possible start dates were discussed at the interview or positive feedback was received, it is important to note that, absent concrete hiring confirmation procedures—such as guidance on an employment medical examination, requests for submission of various documents, and preparation of an employment contract—it will be difficult to argue that a conditional hiring relationship was formed. Workers should carefully secure and retain evidence such as text messages and emails to determine whether there are explicit expressions like “hiring confirmed” or “start date confirmed,” and whether the company actually took follow-up steps premised on hiring. Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s/Company’s Perspective) From the employer’s perspective, even when providing simple interview notices, inquiring about possible start dates, or conveying positive evaluations during the hiring process, it is necessary to use clear expressions so that such communications are not misunderstood as confirmation of hiring. In particular, employers should document the timing of conditional hiring notifications, requests for medical examinations and document submissions, and execution of employment contracts. When a candidate is rejected or hiring is put on hold, the employer should explicitly notify the candidate of that fact in order to prevent disputes over unfair dismissal or cancellation of conditional hiring. This Jeonnam Regional Labor Relations Commission decision once again clarifies that the core issue in unfair dismissal disputes is “whether an employment contract or conditional hiring relationship has been formed.” It suggests that both workers and employers should review legal risks from the hiring stage with the assistance of professional institutions such as Labor Law Firm Law&. 2. Matters Adjudicated a. Case Overview and Procedural History The worker argued that a conditional hiring relationship had been formed because the employer had coordinated a possible start date. However, (i) although it is acknowledged that the employer asked the worker about possible start dates during the interview process, there is no confirmation that the parties reached a meeting of the minds or an agreement on a specific start date; (ii) the worker was never asked by the employer to submit documents such as the employment medical examination report or a copy of a bank account, which are ordinarily required to be submitted by a confirmed hire, and there is no evidence that the parties prepared or executed an employment contract; (iii) the text message records between the worker and the company’s hiring manager submitted by the worker … 3. Summary of the Decision a. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Findings The worker argued that a conditional hiring relationship had been formed because the employer had coordinated a possible start date. However, (i) although it is acknowledged that the employer asked the worker about possible start dates during the interview process, there is no confirmation that the parties reached a meeting of the minds or an agreement on a specific start date; (ii) the worker was never asked by the employer to submit documents such as the employment medical examination report or a copy of a bank account, which are ordinarily required to be submitted by a confirmed hire, and there is no evidence that the parties prepared or executed an employment contract; (iii) the text message records between the worker and the company’s hiring manager submitted by the worker … / [See More Related Decisions] - “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Non-Formation of Conditional Hiring (Absence of Offer Letter)’” – Date of Decision: – Case Result: First-Instance Decision Upheld - “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Fixed-Term Worker (Three-Month Ultra-Short-Term Contract)’” - “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark During Telephone Call)’” [Tags] Unfair dismissal, formation of conditional hiring (no agreement on start date), 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 Labor Law Firm Law&’s “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series. ※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Fixed-Term Worker (Three-Month Ultra-Short-Term Contract)’,” in a new window. ※ A list of decisions related to formation of conditional hiring (no agreement on start date) can be viewed under “List of Decisions Related to Formation of Conditional Hiring (No Agreement on Start Date).” ※ Korean version of this case: Korean article