Corporate trends / Performance record
Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning “Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark Made by Telephone)” (Unfair Dismissal 78)
- Date2026/01/11 14:52
- Read 198
[Case Information]
- Case name: Unfair dismissal decision concerning “expression of intent to resign (resignation remark made by telephone)”
- Date of decision:
- Case number: Dismissed
- Decision-making body: Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission 2025Buhae3886 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2025.11.21
- Summary of outcome: The employee claimed to have been dismissed; however, (1) during a telephone call with a company director, the employee stated, “I can’t work anymore, so I will resign.”
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, the employee filed an application for remedy for unfair dismissal with the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission, asserting that the company’s action constituted unfair dismissal. The employer, on the other hand, argued that the employment relationship had ended because the employee voluntarily notified the company of their resignation.
The Labor Relations Commission examined the contents of the telephone call and text messages, as well as whether the employee reported to work thereafter, and on that basis determined the cause of termination of the employment relationship. The case was concluded in favor of the employer.
Ⅱ. Key Issue
The key issue in this case is whether, in circumstances where the employee said to a company director over the phone, “I can’t work anymore, so I will resign,” and then in fact did not report to work, this can be regarded as a genuine expression of intent to resign, or whether it should instead be viewed as an unfair dismissal by the employer.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case noted that the employee explicitly stated “I will resign” during a telephone conversation with a company director; that the employee did not thereafter return to work; and that, when the company director sent a text message stating, “As you said, we will process the company matter as a resignation,” the employee raised no objection to this.
Taking into account that there were no circumstances suggesting that the employee’s expression of intent to resign was insincere—for example, a joke or a purely formal statement made to avoid pressure or threats—the panel concluded that the employment relationship in this case was terminated by the employee’s voluntary resignation.
The panel therefore found that no dismissal disposition existed in this case, and held that the employee’s claim of unfair dismissal was groundless.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Employees should be aware that even if they say “I will quit” in a moment of heightened emotion, if they then stop reporting to work and raise no objection to the company’s notice that it will process the matter as a resignation, this may be recognized as an actual resignation.
In particular, where the intent to resign is expressed through means that leave a record—such as telephone, text message, or messenger—the question of whether that expression reflects the employee’s true intent becomes a key piece of evidence in an unfair dismissal dispute. Accordingly, if you do not in fact intend to resign, you should immediately and clearly express your intent to retract the statement and to continue your employment.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, where an employee expresses an intent to resign orally or by telephone, it is important, for dispute-prevention purposes, to confirm the content of that expression as concretely as possible and to leave a written or text record to the effect that “we will process your resignation as you have stated.”
However, if the employer pressures or forces the employee to resign (so-called “voluntary resignation” under coercion), the expression of intent may be deemed invalid as not reflecting the employee’s true intent. Employers should therefore objectively record and manage whether the expression was made voluntarily by the employee, and whether there was any subsequent objection or retraction.
Labor Law Firm Law& provides support in disputes relating to unfair dismissal, redundancy, and resignation by organizing the evidentiary structure of each case based on the legal principles distinguishing an employee’s expression of intent to resign from dismissal, and by assisting clients in responding systematically from the Labor Relations Commission stage onward.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
The employee claimed to have been dismissed; however, (1) the employee stated during a telephone call with a company director, “I can’t work anymore, so I will resign,” and thereafter did not report to the company; (2) the company director sent the employee a text message stating, “As you said, we will process the company matter as a resignation,” to which the employee did not respond at all; and (3) there were no circumstances suggesting that the expression of intent to resign was insincere. Taking all of this into account, it was determined that the employment relationship between the parties had been terminated by the employee’s voluntary resignation.
3. Summary of Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The employee claimed to have been dismissed; however, (1) the employee stated during a telephone call with a company director, “I can’t work anymore, so I will resign,” and thereafter did not report to the company; (2) the company director sent the employee a text message stating, “As you said, we will process the company matter as a resignation,” to which the employee did not respond at all; and (3) there were no circumstances suggesting that the expression of intent to resign was insincere. Taking all of this into account, it was determined that the employment relationship between the parties had been terminated by the employee’s voluntary resignation. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “‘Dismissal of Application (Non-Appearance at Hearing)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision” – Date of decision: – Case number: Dismissal of application
- “‘Misunderstanding of Termination by Agreement (Agreement with Employee Representative)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision” – Date of decision: – Case number: Fully upheld
- “‘Re-Disciplinary Action · Excessive Disciplinary Severity (Corporate Card · Fraudulent Receipt of Allowances)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expression of intent to resign (resignation remark made by telephone), 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 one of the “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ You can view the previous article, “‘Re-Disciplinary Action · Excessive Disciplinary Severity (Corporate Card · Fraudulent Receipt of Allowances)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to expression of intent to resign (resignation remark made by telephone) can be found in the “List of Decisions Related to Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark Made by Telephone).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
- Case name: Unfair dismissal decision concerning “expression of intent to resign (resignation remark made by telephone)”
- Date of decision:
- Case number: Dismissed
- Decision-making body: Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission 2025Buhae3886 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2025.11.21
- Summary of outcome: The employee claimed to have been dismissed; however, (1) during a telephone call with a company director, the employee stated, “I can’t work anymore, so I will resign.”
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, the employee filed an application for remedy for unfair dismissal with the Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission, asserting that the company’s action constituted unfair dismissal. The employer, on the other hand, argued that the employment relationship had ended because the employee voluntarily notified the company of their resignation.
The Labor Relations Commission examined the contents of the telephone call and text messages, as well as whether the employee reported to work thereafter, and on that basis determined the cause of termination of the employment relationship. The case was concluded in favor of the employer.
Ⅱ. Key Issue
The key issue in this case is whether, in circumstances where the employee said to a company director over the phone, “I can’t work anymore, so I will resign,” and then in fact did not report to work, this can be regarded as a genuine expression of intent to resign, or whether it should instead be viewed as an unfair dismissal by the employer.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case noted that the employee explicitly stated “I will resign” during a telephone conversation with a company director; that the employee did not thereafter return to work; and that, when the company director sent a text message stating, “As you said, we will process the company matter as a resignation,” the employee raised no objection to this.
Taking into account that there were no circumstances suggesting that the employee’s expression of intent to resign was insincere—for example, a joke or a purely formal statement made to avoid pressure or threats—the panel concluded that the employment relationship in this case was terminated by the employee’s voluntary resignation.
The panel therefore found that no dismissal disposition existed in this case, and held that the employee’s claim of unfair dismissal was groundless.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Employees should be aware that even if they say “I will quit” in a moment of heightened emotion, if they then stop reporting to work and raise no objection to the company’s notice that it will process the matter as a resignation, this may be recognized as an actual resignation.
In particular, where the intent to resign is expressed through means that leave a record—such as telephone, text message, or messenger—the question of whether that expression reflects the employee’s true intent becomes a key piece of evidence in an unfair dismissal dispute. Accordingly, if you do not in fact intend to resign, you should immediately and clearly express your intent to retract the statement and to continue your employment.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, where an employee expresses an intent to resign orally or by telephone, it is important, for dispute-prevention purposes, to confirm the content of that expression as concretely as possible and to leave a written or text record to the effect that “we will process your resignation as you have stated.”
However, if the employer pressures or forces the employee to resign (so-called “voluntary resignation” under coercion), the expression of intent may be deemed invalid as not reflecting the employee’s true intent. Employers should therefore objectively record and manage whether the expression was made voluntarily by the employee, and whether there was any subsequent objection or retraction.
Labor Law Firm Law& provides support in disputes relating to unfair dismissal, redundancy, and resignation by organizing the evidentiary structure of each case based on the legal principles distinguishing an employee’s expression of intent to resign from dismissal, and by assisting clients in responding systematically from the Labor Relations Commission stage onward.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
The employee claimed to have been dismissed; however, (1) the employee stated during a telephone call with a company director, “I can’t work anymore, so I will resign,” and thereafter did not report to the company; (2) the company director sent the employee a text message stating, “As you said, we will process the company matter as a resignation,” to which the employee did not respond at all; and (3) there were no circumstances suggesting that the expression of intent to resign was insincere. Taking all of this into account, it was determined that the employment relationship between the parties had been terminated by the employee’s voluntary resignation.
3. Summary of Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The employee claimed to have been dismissed; however, (1) the employee stated during a telephone call with a company director, “I can’t work anymore, so I will resign,” and thereafter did not report to the company; (2) the company director sent the employee a text message stating, “As you said, we will process the company matter as a resignation,” to which the employee did not respond at all; and (3) there were no circumstances suggesting that the expression of intent to resign was insincere. Taking all of this into account, it was determined that the employment relationship between the parties had been terminated by the employee’s voluntary resignation. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “‘Dismissal of Application (Non-Appearance at Hearing)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision” – Date of decision: – Case number: Dismissal of application
- “‘Misunderstanding of Termination by Agreement (Agreement with Employee Representative)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision” – Date of decision: – Case number: Fully upheld
- “‘Re-Disciplinary Action · Excessive Disciplinary Severity (Corporate Card · Fraudulent Receipt of Allowances)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expression of intent to resign (resignation remark made by telephone), 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 one of the “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ You can view the previous article, “‘Re-Disciplinary Action · Excessive Disciplinary Severity (Corporate Card · Fraudulent Receipt of Allowances)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window.
※ The list of decisions related to expression of intent to resign (resignation remark made by telephone) can be found in the “List of Decisions Related to Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark Made by Telephone).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
