An unfair dismissal relief application was filed in relation to the “existence of an intention to resign (electronic approval resignation letter),” and I would like to share with you a decision in which the employer prevailed, together with its legal implications.

In this post, from the perspective of Labor Law Firm Law&, we briefly summarize the structure of the Labor Relations Commission’s reasoning and practical points to note in similar disputes involving redundancy dismissals and voluntary resignations.

1. Legal Implications

The issue in this case was whether “the resignation letter submitted by the employee through the electronic approval system constituted a voluntary resignation based on the employee’s true intention, or whether it should instead be regarded as a de facto dismissal by the employer, thereby falling within the scope of unfair dismissal subject to relief.”

The decision-making panel in this case found that: on 26 September 2025, the employee first visited the Head of Production Headquarters and the Head of Planning and Management to express an intention to resign; on the same day, the employee handwrote a resignation letter specifying the date of retirement as “26 September 2025” and the reason for resignation as “household affairs,” and then personally submitted it through the company’s electronic approval system; the employer, on the following day, 27 September 2025, approved and accepted the resignation letter in accordance with the usual procedures; and there were no circumstances revealed in the overall process of submitting the resignation letter that would indicate the employer coerced or pressured the employee to resign.

Therefore, notwithstanding the employee’s assertion that the resignation letter was submitted involuntarily due to financial hardship, fear of disadvantage in personnel matters, and implicit pressure from superiors, the panel held as follows:

This termination did not constitute a unilateral termination of the employment contract by the employer, but rather a consensual termination formed when the employer accepted the employee’s expression of intent to resign based on the employee’s true intention. Accordingly, no dismissal existed, and it did not amount to unfair dismissal.

Where a resignation letter has been submitted, the Labor Relations Commission and the courts tend to determine the existence of true intent by comprehensively considering the specific contents of the resignation letter, the circumstances of its drafting and submission, the method of processing (including electronic approval), and whether there were any circumstances of coercion or pressure. When receiving resignation letters in the course of restructuring or personnel management, employers should conduct procedures transparently so that no circumstances suggesting coercion or forced choice remain, and should keep records regarding the circumstances of the resignation. From the employee’s standpoint, if there was no intention to resign, it is crucial in any subsequent unfair dismissal dispute to clearly express an intention to withdraw the resignation without delay and to secure objective evidence of any specific circumstances of coercion or pressure.

2. Matters Determined

Taking into account that the employee visited the Head of Production Headquarters and the Head of Planning and Management on 26 September 2025 to express an intention to resign; that on the same day the employee drafted a resignation letter stating the date of retirement as “26 September 2025” and the reason for resignation as “household affairs,” and submitted it through the company’s electronic approval system; that the employer approved the employee’s resignation letter on 27 September 2025; and that there were no circumstances in the process of submitting the resignation letter that would indicate the employer coerced or pressured the employee to resign, the panel concluded that the employment relationship was terminated when the employer accepted the resignation letter submitted by the employee, and therefore no dismissal existed.

3. Gist of the Decision

Taking into account that the employee visited the Head of Production Headquarters and the Head of Planning and Management on 26 September 2025 to express an intention to resign; that on the same day the employee drafted a resignation letter stating the date of retirement as “26 September 2025” and the reason for resignation as “household affairs,” and submitted it through the company’s electronic approval system; that the employer approved the employee’s resignation letter on 27 September 2025; and that there were no circumstances in the process of submitting the resignation letter that would indicate the employer coerced or pressured the employee to resign, the panel concluded that the employment relationship was terminated when the employer accepted the resignation letter submitted by the employee, and therefore no dismissal existed. /