Corporate trends / Performance record
Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning “Acceptance of Resignation Letter (Voluntary Resignation)” (Unfair Dismissal 560)
- Date2026/07/21 04:13
- Read 14
[Case Information]
This case is a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “acceptance of resignation letter (voluntary resignation).”
Adjudicating Body: Chungnam Regional Labor Relations Commission
2026Buhae489 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2026-05-26 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of Key Issue: Since the employment relationship is deemed to have been terminated by mutual consent when the employer accepted the resignation letter submitted by the employee in this case, there is no fact that the employer unilaterally dismissed the employee.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this application for remedy for unfair dismissal, the employee claimed before the Labor Relations Commission that the employer had unilaterally dismissed him/her. The employer, however, maintained that the employment relationship had simply ended because it accepted the resignation letter submitted by the employee, and that there was therefore no dismissal. The Chungnam Regional Labor Relations Commission conducted its hearing focusing on this point.
The Commission held that, once the resignation letter submitted by the employee had been accepted by the employer, the employment relationship should be regarded as having been terminated by mutual consent of the parties, and accordingly dismissed the employee’s application for remedy for unfair dismissal.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether, when an employer accepts a resignation letter submitted by an employee, this can be regarded as an unfair dismissal, or whether it should instead be viewed as a lawful termination of the employment relationship by resignation/termination by agreement.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case noted that the employer accepted the resignation letter submitted by the employee; that, through such acceptance, the employer’s intention to terminate the employment contract was clearly expressed; and that there was no indication that the resignation letter had been submitted under coercion or that it did not reflect the employee’s true intent.
In light of these circumstances, the panel determined that there had been a concurrence of intent between the employee and the employer to terminate the employment relationship.
The panel therefore found that no dismissal disposition existed in this case at all, and that, since there was no dismissal in the first place, there was no need to further examine whether any dismissal was justified.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Where an employee voluntarily submits a resignation letter and the employer accepts it, the principal issue, in principle, is not an application for remedy for unfair dismissal but rather the “genuineness of the expression of intent to resign.” If the employee in fact had no intention to resign, or submitted the resignation letter only because of coercion, threats, or similar pressure, it is essential to secure concrete evidence of the process, statements, and circumstances (such as recordings, text messages, messenger records, etc.) in order to increase the likelihood that the Labor Relations Commission will recognize the situation as a dismissal.
In addition, if the employee changes his or her mind after submitting a resignation letter, the possibility of withdrawing the resignation depends on whether the employer’s acceptance has already been communicated to the employee or not. Accordingly, employees should consult with experts, such as Labor Law Firm Law&, before submitting a resignation letter.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, in order to reduce disputes over resignation versus unfair dismissal, it is important to keep clear records of whether the resignation letter was handwritten, the circumstances of its preparation and submission, and the date and method of acceptance. In particular, when requesting employees to submit resignation letters en masse in the context of restructuring or collective redundancies, there is a risk that such resignations may be evaluated as de facto dismissals in the form of voluntary resignation. Employers should therefore design procedures in a manner that does not undermine employees’ voluntariness.
Furthermore, depending on whether the expression of intent to resign constitutes an offer to terminate the employment relationship by agreement or a simple notice of termination, the timing at which withdrawal is possible and the pattern of disputes may differ. Employers are advised to review in advance the legal principles established in Labor Relations Commission decisions and Supreme Court precedents, and to refine their HR and labor-management policies with advice from experts such as Labor Law Firm Law&.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
Since the employment relationship is deemed to have been terminated by mutual consent when the employer accepted the resignation letter submitted by the employee in this case, there is no fact that the employer unilaterally dismissed the employee. Therefore, there is no need to further examine whether any dismissal was justified.
3. Gist of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
Since the employment relationship is deemed to have been terminated by mutual consent when the employer accepted the resignation letter submitted by the employee in this case, there is no fact that the employer unilaterally dismissed the employee. Therefore, there is no need to further examine whether any dismissal was justified. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Non-Formation of Employment Offer (Absence of Offer Letter)’” – Decision date: - Case result: Original decision upheld
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Dismissal of Application (Non-Appearance at Hearing)’” – Decision date: - Case result: Dismissed
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, acceptance of resignation letter (voluntary resignation), 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 the “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Termination upon Expiry of Fixed Term (Life Project Fund Assistant Professor)’,” in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to acceptance of resignation letters (voluntary resignation) can be found in the “List of Decisions Related to Acceptance of Resignation Letters (Voluntary Resignation).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “acceptance of resignation letter (voluntary resignation).”
Adjudicating Body: Chungnam Regional Labor Relations Commission
2026Buhae489 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2026-05-26 · Case result: Dismissed
Summary of Key Issue: Since the employment relationship is deemed to have been terminated by mutual consent when the employer accepted the resignation letter submitted by the employee in this case, there is no fact that the employer unilaterally dismissed the employee.
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this application for remedy for unfair dismissal, the employee claimed before the Labor Relations Commission that the employer had unilaterally dismissed him/her. The employer, however, maintained that the employment relationship had simply ended because it accepted the resignation letter submitted by the employee, and that there was therefore no dismissal. The Chungnam Regional Labor Relations Commission conducted its hearing focusing on this point.
The Commission held that, once the resignation letter submitted by the employee had been accepted by the employer, the employment relationship should be regarded as having been terminated by mutual consent of the parties, and accordingly dismissed the employee’s application for remedy for unfair dismissal.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether, when an employer accepts a resignation letter submitted by an employee, this can be regarded as an unfair dismissal, or whether it should instead be viewed as a lawful termination of the employment relationship by resignation/termination by agreement.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case noted that the employer accepted the resignation letter submitted by the employee; that, through such acceptance, the employer’s intention to terminate the employment contract was clearly expressed; and that there was no indication that the resignation letter had been submitted under coercion or that it did not reflect the employee’s true intent.
In light of these circumstances, the panel determined that there had been a concurrence of intent between the employee and the employer to terminate the employment relationship.
The panel therefore found that no dismissal disposition existed in this case at all, and that, since there was no dismissal in the first place, there was no need to further examine whether any dismissal was justified.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Where an employee voluntarily submits a resignation letter and the employer accepts it, the principal issue, in principle, is not an application for remedy for unfair dismissal but rather the “genuineness of the expression of intent to resign.” If the employee in fact had no intention to resign, or submitted the resignation letter only because of coercion, threats, or similar pressure, it is essential to secure concrete evidence of the process, statements, and circumstances (such as recordings, text messages, messenger records, etc.) in order to increase the likelihood that the Labor Relations Commission will recognize the situation as a dismissal.
In addition, if the employee changes his or her mind after submitting a resignation letter, the possibility of withdrawing the resignation depends on whether the employer’s acceptance has already been communicated to the employee or not. Accordingly, employees should consult with experts, such as Labor Law Firm Law&, before submitting a resignation letter.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, in order to reduce disputes over resignation versus unfair dismissal, it is important to keep clear records of whether the resignation letter was handwritten, the circumstances of its preparation and submission, and the date and method of acceptance. In particular, when requesting employees to submit resignation letters en masse in the context of restructuring or collective redundancies, there is a risk that such resignations may be evaluated as de facto dismissals in the form of voluntary resignation. Employers should therefore design procedures in a manner that does not undermine employees’ voluntariness.
Furthermore, depending on whether the expression of intent to resign constitutes an offer to terminate the employment relationship by agreement or a simple notice of termination, the timing at which withdrawal is possible and the pattern of disputes may differ. Employers are advised to review in advance the legal principles established in Labor Relations Commission decisions and Supreme Court precedents, and to refine their HR and labor-management policies with advice from experts such as Labor Law Firm Law&.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
Since the employment relationship is deemed to have been terminated by mutual consent when the employer accepted the resignation letter submitted by the employee in this case, there is no fact that the employer unilaterally dismissed the employee. Therefore, there is no need to further examine whether any dismissal was justified.
3. Gist of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
Since the employment relationship is deemed to have been terminated by mutual consent when the employer accepted the resignation letter submitted by the employee in this case, there is no fact that the employer unilaterally dismissed the employee. Therefore, there is no need to further examine whether any dismissal was justified. /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Non-Formation of Employment Offer (Absence of Offer Letter)’” – Decision date: - Case result: Original decision upheld
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’”
- “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Dismissal of Application (Non-Appearance at Hearing)’” – Decision date: - Case result: Dismissed
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, acceptance of resignation letter (voluntary resignation), 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 the “Unfair Dismissal Decisions” series by Labor Law Firm Law&.
※ You can view the previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Termination upon Expiry of Fixed Term (Life Project Fund Assistant Professor)’,” in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to acceptance of resignation letters (voluntary resignation) can be found in the “List of Decisions Related to Acceptance of Resignation Letters (Voluntary Resignation).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
