This case concerns an unfair dismissal decision in which the employee prevailed in full on the issue of “expectation of renewal (internally recruited fixed-term employee with at least 3 years remaining until retirement).” [Case Information] This case is a precedent in which a fixed-term employee claiming unfair dismissal sought relief before the Labor Relations Commission, and the employee ultimately prevailed in full on the issue of “expectation of renewal (internally recruited fixed-term employee with at least 3 years remaining until retirement).” Adjudicating body: Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026BuHae836 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal 2026-09-11 · Outcome: Fully upheld (employee’s claim accepted) Summary of key issue: A. Whether the employee had an expectation of renewal There was a basis for a one-year contract extension in the Detailed Enforcement Rules of the Organization Regulations and in the work contract, and the internal job posting also expressly stated that the one-year contract could be extended depending on the results of job performance evaluations. 1. Legal Implications In this Incheon Regional Labor Relations Commission case, a fixed-term employee who alleged unfair dismissal applied to the Commission for relief, and Labor Law Firm Law& organized and applied the relevant legal principles. The central issues were whether an expectation of renewal could be recognized for a fixed-term employee selected through an internal job posting, and whether the refusal to renew the contract constituted an unfair dismissal. Ⅰ. Case Overview The employee was hired through an internal job posting as a fixed-term employee for an initial period of two years. The Detailed Enforcement Rules of the Organization Regulations and the work contract both contained provisions on a one-year contract extension. The job posting stated that the one-year contract could be extended depending on the results of job performance evaluations, and eligibility to apply was limited to “those with at least three years remaining until the mandatory retirement age.” In practice, the company had extended the contracts of other employees, and this employee likewise had no restriction on extension in terms of retirement age. When renewal was refused at the time of contract expiry, the employee filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal. Ⅱ. Issues The issues in this case were: “In light of the Detailed Enforcement Rules of the Organization Regulations, the work contract, the contents of the internal job posting, and the actual practice of extensions, does the employee have an expectation of renewal of the employment contract? If such an expectation of renewal is recognized, does the employer have a reasonable ground for refusing renewal such that the refusal does not constitute an unfair dismissal?” Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning The panel in this case held that an expectation of renewal for one year under certain conditions could be legitimately recognized, based on the following: the Detailed Enforcement Rules of the Organization Regulations and the work contract expressly provided a basis for a one-year contract extension; the internal job posting specifically stipulated that the one-year contract could be extended depending on the results of job performance evaluations; although the initial contract period was set at two years, eligibility to apply was limited to “those with at least three years remaining until the mandatory retirement age”; there were actual cases in which other employees’ contracts had been extended; and the employee in question also had no particular restriction on extension in terms of retirement age. The Commission further held that, under Supreme Court precedent recognizing that a refusal to renew a contract premised on an expectation of renewal may constitute an unfair dismissal, the employer’s refusal to renew in this case was unfair to the extent that it required further examination as to whether the employer could prove reasonable grounds for refusing renewal. Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective) Even fixed-term employees may be found to have an expectation of renewal where there are specific provisions in the employment contract, organization regulations, detailed enforcement rules, job postings, or HR guidelines that provide a concrete basis for renewal, such as “renewal possible depending on evaluation results,” and where there is an established practice of extending contracts for similarly situated employees. In particular, as in this case, where the eligibility criteria are set on the premise of long-term service—such as “those with at least three years remaining until the mandatory retirement age”—which presupposes a retirement age longer than the initial contract period (two years), an employer will find it difficult to avoid responsibility by merely asserting “automatic separation upon expiry of the term.” Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective) When managing fixed-term personnel, employers must recognize that the way in which the possibility of renewal is expressed in job postings, contracts, and internal regulations is decisive in determining whether an expectation of renewal will be recognized. Unless the criteria for renewal, evaluation methods, number of possible extensions, and relationship with the retirement age are clearly defined, and the actual operational practice is consistently aligned with those criteria, a “formal termination” based solely on the expiry of the contract term may be deemed an unfair dismissal by the Labor Relations Commission or the courts. This type of decision illustrates that, depending on the content of the rules and the actual operation in practice, the termination of a fixed-term employment contract may be viewed either as a simple expiry of the term or, in substance, as a refusal to renew amounting to an unfair dismissal. It is highly advisable to prevent disputes by consulting experts such as Labor Law Firm Law& from the recruitment stage, and by properly structuring job postings, contracts, and internal regulations in advance. 2. Matters Adjudicated A. Case Overview and Procedural History A. Whether the employee had an expectation of renewal There was a basis for a one-year contract extension in the Detailed Enforcement Rules of the Organization Regulations and in the work contract, and the internal job posting also expressly stated that the one-year contract could be extended depending on the results of job performance evaluations. In addition, considering that, although the initial contract period in the job posting was two years, eligibility to apply was limited to those with at least three years remaining until the mandatory retirement age, that there were actual cases of contract extensions, and that the employee also had no restriction on extension in terms of retirement age, a legitimate expectation that the contract could be renewed for one year upon satisfaction of certain conditions is recognized. B. If an expectation of renewal exists, whether there is a reasonable ground for refusing renewal … 3. Summary of the Decision A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning A. Whether the employee had an expectation of renewal There was a basis for a one-year contract extension in the Detailed Enforcement Rules of the Organization Regulations and in the work contract, and the internal job posting also expressly stated that the one-year contract could be extended depending on the results of job performance evaluations. In addition, considering that, although the initial contract period in the job posting was two years, eligibility to apply was limited to those with at least three years remaining until the mandatory retirement age, that there were actual cases of contract extensions, and that the employee also had no restriction on extension in terms of retirement age, a legitimate expectation that the contract could be renewed for one year upon satisfaction of certain conditions is recognized. B. If an expectation of renewal exists, whether there is a reasonable ground for refusing renewal … / [See More Related Decisions] - “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Failure to Satisfy Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’” - “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Dismissal Rejected (Non-Appearance at Hearing)’” – Date of decision: – Case number: Dismissal of application - “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Denial of Employee Status (Privately Owned Delivery Vehicle)’” [Tags] Unfair dismissal, expectation of renewal (internally recruited fixed-term employee with at least 3 years remaining until retirement), 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 Labor Law Firm Law&’s “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series. ※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Denial of Employee Status (Privately Owned Delivery Vehicle)’,” in a new window. ※ A list of decisions related to expectation of renewal (internally recruited fixed-term employee with at least 3 years remaining until retirement) can be found under “List of Decisions on Expectation of Renewal (Internally Recruited Fixed-Term Employee with at Least 3 Years Remaining Until Retirement).” ※ Korean version of this case: Korean article