[Case Information] This case is a decision in which the employee prevailed (full acceptance) on the issue of “lack of just cause (communication issues · poor job performance).” Decision Committee: Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026Buhae2660 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal 2026-09-07 · Result: Fully upheld Summary of key issues: Although the dismissal notice stated the reasons for dismissal as “lack of communication with related staff, insufficient familiarity with duties, and lack of responsibility,” the employer’s rules of employment contained no provision allowing dismissal on the grounds of lack of communication with related staff, insufficient familiarity with duties, or lack of responsibility. Moreover, even if there were circumstances in which the employee’s communication and cooperation with colleagues during the post-probation handover process were not good, this could not be regarded as a culpable reason of such gravity that, under social norms, the employment relationship could no longer be maintained... --- 1. Legal Implications Ⅰ. Case Overview In this case, the employer delivered a dismissal notice to the employee, stating as grounds for dismissal “lack of communication with related staff, insufficient familiarity with duties, and lack of responsibility,” and then dismissed the employee. The employee filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal. After examining whether the dismissal was unfair, the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission rendered a decision fully upholding the employee’s application. Ⅱ. Issues in Dispute The issue in this case is whether a dismissal based on problems in communication and cooperation between employees and poor job performance revealed during the post-probation handover process can be recognized as a lawful dismissal, even though there is no basis for such dismissal in the rules of employment and the reasons do not constitute culpable grounds of such seriousness that, under social norms, the employment relationship cannot be continued. Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning The panel in this case noted that there is no provision anywhere in the employer’s rules of employment allowing dismissal on the grounds of “lack of communication with related staff, insufficient familiarity with duties, and lack of responsibility.” It further found that, even if the employee’s attitude toward communication and cooperation with colleagues during the post-probation handover process was not good, this alone is difficult to regard as a culpable reason of such gravity that, under social norms, the employment relationship cannot be maintained. In light of the content and degree of the stated grounds for dismissal, it was also difficult to find that there was an objectively reasonable cause for dismissal. Accordingly, the Commission held that the dismissal in this case constituted an unfair dismissal lacking the “just cause” required under Article 23 of the Labor Standards Act. Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective) From the employee’s perspective, even if communication issues or poor job performance are pointed out, these do not automatically constitute just cause for dismissal. The key criteria are whether there is a basis in the rules of employment or personnel regulations, and whether, under social norms, the situation is so serious that it is difficult to maintain the employment relationship. If you receive a dismissal notice, you should check whether the stated grounds for dismissal are provided for in the applicable regulations, secure materials showing the specific content and degree of those grounds, and then consider filing an application with the Labor Relations Commission for a remedy for unfair dismissal. Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s/Company’s Perspective) From the employer’s perspective, abstract expressions such as “lack of communication” or “insufficient familiarity with duties” are unlikely to be recognized as just cause for dismissal. Even where grounds for dismissal are clearly stipulated in the rules of employment, in practice the employer must still prove misconduct or lack of ability of a level that is significant under social norms. When operating probationary or trial employment systems, rather than dismissing employees for mere conflicts or temporary inadequacies, employers should design a structure in which they leave records of specific feedback, training, and opportunities for improvement, and resort to dismissal only as a last measure. In disputes like this one, where the existence of unfair dismissal is at issue, both employees and companies should proceed on the understanding that the Labor Relations Commission strictly examines whether there are grounds for dismissal under the rules of employment and whether, under social norms, the employment relationship can be maintained. Both sides are advised to seek the assistance of experts such as Labor Law Firm Law& to review personnel and labor risks in advance. 2. Matters Decided a. Case Overview and Procedural History Although the dismissal notice stated the reasons for dismissal as “lack of communication with related staff, insufficient familiarity with duties, and lack of responsibility,” the employer’s rules of employment contained no provision allowing dismissal on the grounds of lack of communication with related staff, insufficient familiarity with duties, or lack of responsibility. Furthermore, even if there were circumstances in which the employee’s communication and cooperation with colleagues during the post-probation handover process were not good, this is difficult to regard, under social norms, as a culpable reason of such gravity that the employment relationship cannot be maintained. Accordingly, there were no grounds for dismissing the employee, and the dismissal was unfair. 3. Summary of the Decision a. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning Although the dismissal notice stated the reasons for dismissal as “lack of communication with related staff, insufficient familiarity with duties, and lack of responsibility,” the employer’s rules of employment contained no provision allowing dismissal on the grounds of lack of communication with related staff, insufficient familiarity with duties, or lack of responsibility. Furthermore, even if there were circumstances in which the employee’s communication and cooperation with colleagues during the post-probation handover process were not good, this is difficult to regard, under social norms, as a culpable reason of such gravity that the employment relationship cannot be maintained. Accordingly, there were no grounds for dismissing the employee, and the dismissal was unfair. / [See More Related Decisions] - “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Employee Status (Academy Investor · Shuttle Driver · Shuttle Assistant Instructor)’” - “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’” - “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’” [Tags] Unfair dismissal, lack of just cause (communication issues · poor job performance), performance evaluation · poor performance, 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, “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Employee Status (Academy Investor · Shuttle Driver · Shuttle Assistant Instructor)’,” in a new window. ※ The list of decisions relating to lack of just cause (communication issues · poor job performance) can be viewed together at “List of Decisions on Lack of Just Cause (Communication Issues · Poor Job Performance).” ※ Korean version of this case: Korean article