Corporate trends / Performance record
Unfair Dismissal Case Concerning “Expiry of Contract Term (Fixed-Term Employment Until Construction Completion)” (Unfair Dismissal 523)
- Date2026/07/05 04:17
- Read 40
[Case Information]
This case is a decision that was concluded by upholding the first-instance ruling on the issue of “expiry of contract term (fixed-term employment until construction completion).”
Decision Committee: Central Labor Relations Commission 2025Buhae9605 ○ ○ ○ Application for Re-Examination of Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026-06-02 · Case Result: First-Instance Decision Upheld
Key Issue Summary: The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As the contract term expired upon completion of the construction, the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no dismissal exists.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
This case concerns a fixed-term worker employed at a construction site who filed an application for remedy with the Labor Relations Commission, disputing whether the termination of the employment relationship upon completion of the construction constituted unfair dismissal. The Central Labor Relations Commission upheld the first-instance decision, focusing on whether the termination of the employment contract was the employer’s act of dismissal or a natural termination due to the expiry of the contract term.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether, in respect of a fixed-term worker whose contract period was set to run “until the completion of the construction work,” the termination of the employment relationship simultaneously with the completion of the construction can be regarded as a dismissal, and furthermore, whether it can be the subject of an application for remedy for unfair dismissal.
Ⅲ. Key Points of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
The decision panel in this case took into account the following: the employment contract clearly stipulated the contract period as running until the completion of the construction work; the contractually specified ground—completion of the construction—actually occurred, and the construction work no longer continued; and, as a matter of legal principle, a fixed-term employment contract, absent special circumstances, naturally terminates upon expiry of its term.
Given that the worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work, the employment relationship must be deemed to have terminated upon expiry of that term without any separate expression of intent to dismiss by the employer. Furthermore, there were no special circumstances indicating that the term was merely formal such that the contract had in substance been converted into an open-ended contract, nor that the worker had an objectively reasonable expectation of renewal (a “legitimate expectation of continued employment”) to remain employed even after completion of the construction.
Accordingly, the panel held that no “dismissal” existed in this case, and therefore there was no dismissal that could be the subject of an application for remedy for unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective)
Workers should first check whether the employment contract specifies the contract period as “until the completion of the construction work” or similar wording, and whether expiry of that period is in fact linked to the completion of the construction. Even for fixed-term workers, if a legitimate expectation of continued employment has been formed—due to long-term repeated renewals, practices concerning other workers in similar positions, or established criteria for renewal—then a refusal to renew may constitute unfair dismissal. It is therefore important to organize in detail the circumstances of one’s own contract renewals and the practices at the workplace.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, when managing manpower for construction or project-based work, it is necessary to clearly specify in the employment contract the contract period and grounds for termination (e.g., the completion date of a particular construction project), and to consistently maintain an operational practice of terminating the employment relationship upon expiry of that period. However, if fixed-term workers in the same or similar positions are repeatedly renewed over a long period, or are in substance managed in the same way as regular employees while only formally remaining fixed-term, issues may arise concerning legitimate expectations of renewal or conversion to open-ended contracts. Employers should therefore review their HR and labor-management structures in advance.
In this type of case, whether unfair dismissal is found turns on (i) whether there was a “dismissal” and (ii) whether the contract term has substantive meaning in practice. Both workers and employers should systematically prepare evidentiary materials concerning the wording of the employment contract, renewal practices, and the characteristics of the business. It should be borne in mind that the Labor Relations Commission and the courts will assess not only the contractual wording but also the actual operational conduct and practices in a comprehensive manner.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As that period expired (upon completion of the construction), the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no dismissal exists. The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As that period expired (upon completion of the construction), the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no dismissal exists. The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As that period expired (upon completion of the construction), the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no [dismissal] exists.
3. Gist of the Decision
A. Key Points of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As that period expired (upon completion of the construction), the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no dismissal exists. The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As that period expired (upon completion of the construction), the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no dismissal exists. The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As that period expired (upon completion of the construction), the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no [dismissal] exists. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark Made by Telephone)”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning Non-Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)” – Decision Date: – Case Result: First-Instance Decision Upheld
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning Unauthorized Concurrent Employment (Paid Operation of a School Hobby Class)”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expiry of contract term (fixed-term employment until construction completion), 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 Concerning Unauthorized Concurrent Employment (Paid Operation of a School Hobby Class),” in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to expiry of contract term (fixed-term employment until construction completion) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions Related to Expiry of Contract Term (Fixed-Term Employment Until Construction Completion).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision that was concluded by upholding the first-instance ruling on the issue of “expiry of contract term (fixed-term employment until construction completion).”
Decision Committee: Central Labor Relations Commission 2025Buhae9605 ○ ○ ○ Application for Re-Examination of Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026-06-02 · Case Result: First-Instance Decision Upheld
Key Issue Summary: The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As the contract term expired upon completion of the construction, the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no dismissal exists.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
This case concerns a fixed-term worker employed at a construction site who filed an application for remedy with the Labor Relations Commission, disputing whether the termination of the employment relationship upon completion of the construction constituted unfair dismissal. The Central Labor Relations Commission upheld the first-instance decision, focusing on whether the termination of the employment contract was the employer’s act of dismissal or a natural termination due to the expiry of the contract term.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether, in respect of a fixed-term worker whose contract period was set to run “until the completion of the construction work,” the termination of the employment relationship simultaneously with the completion of the construction can be regarded as a dismissal, and furthermore, whether it can be the subject of an application for remedy for unfair dismissal.
Ⅲ. Key Points of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
The decision panel in this case took into account the following: the employment contract clearly stipulated the contract period as running until the completion of the construction work; the contractually specified ground—completion of the construction—actually occurred, and the construction work no longer continued; and, as a matter of legal principle, a fixed-term employment contract, absent special circumstances, naturally terminates upon expiry of its term.
Given that the worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work, the employment relationship must be deemed to have terminated upon expiry of that term without any separate expression of intent to dismiss by the employer. Furthermore, there were no special circumstances indicating that the term was merely formal such that the contract had in substance been converted into an open-ended contract, nor that the worker had an objectively reasonable expectation of renewal (a “legitimate expectation of continued employment”) to remain employed even after completion of the construction.
Accordingly, the panel held that no “dismissal” existed in this case, and therefore there was no dismissal that could be the subject of an application for remedy for unfair dismissal.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective)
Workers should first check whether the employment contract specifies the contract period as “until the completion of the construction work” or similar wording, and whether expiry of that period is in fact linked to the completion of the construction. Even for fixed-term workers, if a legitimate expectation of continued employment has been formed—due to long-term repeated renewals, practices concerning other workers in similar positions, or established criteria for renewal—then a refusal to renew may constitute unfair dismissal. It is therefore important to organize in detail the circumstances of one’s own contract renewals and the practices at the workplace.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, when managing manpower for construction or project-based work, it is necessary to clearly specify in the employment contract the contract period and grounds for termination (e.g., the completion date of a particular construction project), and to consistently maintain an operational practice of terminating the employment relationship upon expiry of that period. However, if fixed-term workers in the same or similar positions are repeatedly renewed over a long period, or are in substance managed in the same way as regular employees while only formally remaining fixed-term, issues may arise concerning legitimate expectations of renewal or conversion to open-ended contracts. Employers should therefore review their HR and labor-management structures in advance.
In this type of case, whether unfair dismissal is found turns on (i) whether there was a “dismissal” and (ii) whether the contract term has substantive meaning in practice. Both workers and employers should systematically prepare evidentiary materials concerning the wording of the employment contract, renewal practices, and the characteristics of the business. It should be borne in mind that the Labor Relations Commission and the courts will assess not only the contractual wording but also the actual operational conduct and practices in a comprehensive manner.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As that period expired (upon completion of the construction), the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no dismissal exists. The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As that period expired (upon completion of the construction), the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no dismissal exists. The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As that period expired (upon completion of the construction), the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no [dismissal] exists.
3. Gist of the Decision
A. Key Points of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As that period expired (upon completion of the construction), the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no dismissal exists. The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As that period expired (upon completion of the construction), the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no dismissal exists. The worker was a fixed-term employee whose contract period ran until the completion of the construction work. As that period expired (upon completion of the construction), the employment relationship naturally terminated, and therefore no [dismissal] exists. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark Made by Telephone)”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning Non-Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)” – Decision Date: – Case Result: First-Instance Decision Upheld
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning Unauthorized Concurrent Employment (Paid Operation of a School Hobby Class)”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expiry of contract term (fixed-term employment until construction completion), 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 Concerning Unauthorized Concurrent Employment (Paid Operation of a School Hobby Class),” in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to expiry of contract term (fixed-term employment until construction completion) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions Related to Expiry of Contract Term (Fixed-Term Employment Until Construction Completion).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
