Corporate trends / Performance record
‘Refusal of Employment Succession (Termination of Private Consignment)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision (Unfair Dismissal 585)
- Date2026/07/30 04:06
- Read 20
[Case Information]
This case is a decision in which the employee prevailed in full on the issue of “refusal of employment succession (termination of private consignment).”
Decision Committee: Jeju Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026Buhae80 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026-05-21 · Result: Fully upheld (employee’s claim accepted in full)
Summary of key issues:
A. Whether a “dismissal” exists
Given that the employment contract did not contain any provision limiting the contract term to the consigned project period, that the employer took the initiative in proposing to the commissioning institution that the consigned project be privately outsourced, that the employer delivered a written notice explicitly stating “dismissal” (해고), not “termination of the employment contract,” to the employee one month before the decision on employment succession was made, and that the employer unilaterally notified the employee that even an employment relationship with an employee hired without a fixed term would automatically terminate upon the end of the consigned project, on the ground that the consigned project had ended, the Commission found that …
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
This case concerns whether the termination of an employment relationship between an employer performing a specific consigned project under a private consignment structure and an employee hired without a fixed term, on the ground of the termination of the consigned project, constitutes an unfair dismissal.
The employee, taking the position that his/her employment contract continued to exist even after the consigned project ended, filed an application for remedy for unfair dismissal with the Labor Relations Commission. The Jeju Regional Labor Relations Commission examined whether the dismissal was unfair and rendered a decision fully upholding the employee’s claim.
Labor Law Firm Law& wishes to emphasize that, in unfair dismissal disputes of this nature, it is crucial to prepare the Labor Relations Commission procedures and the legal theories relating to redundancy (collective dismissal) and employment succession with precision.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is:
“Whether, solely on the ground that the consigned project has ended, the employment relationship with an employee hired without a fixed term automatically terminates, or whether the employer’s act should be regarded as a dismissal, in which case it must satisfy the just cause and procedural requirements under the Labor Standards Act.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Findings
The decision panel in this case noted that there was no express provision in the employment contract limiting the contract term to the “consigned project period,” that the employer itself proposed to the commissioning institution that the consigned project be privately outsourced and thereby led the change in business structure, that the employer delivered a written notice of dismissal explicitly stating “dismissal” (해고), not “termination of the employment contract,” to the employee one month before the decision on employment succession was finalized, and that the employer unilaterally notified the employee that the employment relationship with an employee hired without a fixed term would also automatically terminate due to the end of the consigned project.
In light of these circumstances, the Commission determined that the employer’s action did not constitute a natural retirement arising from the mere expiration of the consignment contract, but rather a “dismissal” in which the employer unilaterally terminated the employment relationship regardless of the employee’s intent.
The Commission held that this dismissal was unfair, on the ground that the termination of a specific consignment contract, by itself, does not allow an employer to automatically discharge an employee hired without a fixed term, and that, absent satisfaction of the separate requirements for redundancy (collective dismissal), such dismissal is unjustified.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Employees working in private consignment or service contract projects should first carefully check how the contract term is stated in their employment contracts, and whether it is directly linked to the project period. Even if you are simply notified that your employment will “automatically terminate” due to the end of the project, the situation may in fact constitute a dismissal.
Accordingly, it is necessary to review and organize the contents and timing of the dismissal notice, as well as whether the employer took the initiative in changing the business structure, and to consider filing an application for remedy for unfair dismissal with the Labor Relations Commission.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, if you plan to change the structure of consigned/outsourced projects or to terminate private consignment, you must carefully examine whether you can satisfy the requirements for redundancy (collective dismissal) with respect to employees hired without a fixed term (managerial necessity, efforts to avoid dismissal, reasonable and fair selection criteria, good-faith consultation, etc.).
In particular, if the employment contract does not contain a clause linking the contract term to the project period, you should bear in mind that it is difficult to regard the employment relationship as terminated solely by using the expression “automatic termination upon project completion.”
To prevent unnecessary unfair dismissal disputes in cases of this type, employers should, in advance of any changes in private consignment or service contracts, establish measures for employment succession, assess the necessity and procedures for redundancy (collective dismissal), and set out the method of written dismissal notice. It is important to systematically manage the facts in a manner consistent with the relevant legal principles.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Whether a dismissal exists
Given that the employment contract did not contain any provision limiting the contract term to the consigned project period, that the employer took the initiative in proposing to the commissioning institution that the consigned project be privately outsourced, that the employer delivered a written notice explicitly stating “dismissal” (해고), not “termination of the employment contract,” to the employee one month before the decision on employment succession was made, and that the employer unilaterally notified the employee that the employment relationship with an employee hired without a fixed term would automatically terminate upon the end of the consigned project, on the ground that the consigned project had ended, it is recognized that a dismissal exists.
B. Whether the dismissal was justified
The termination of a specific consignment contract, by itself, does not constitute a natural retirement of an employee hired without a fixed term …
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Findings
A. Whether a dismissal exists
Given that the employment contract did not contain any provision limiting the contract term to the consigned project period, that the employer took the initiative in proposing to the commissioning institution that the consigned project be privately outsourced, that the employer delivered a written notice explicitly stating “dismissal” (해고), not “termination of the employment contract,” to the employee one month before the decision on employment succession was made, and that the employer unilaterally notified the employee that the employment relationship with an employee hired without a fixed term would automatically terminate upon the end of the consigned project, on the ground that the consigned project had ended, it is recognized that a dismissal exists.
B. Whether the dismissal was justified
The termination of a specific consignment contract, by itself, does not constitute a natural retirement of an employee hired without a fixed term … /
[See More Related Decisions]
- ‘Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’
- ‘Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to Dismissal of Application (Non-Appearance at Hearing)’ – Date of Decision: – Case Number: Dismissed
- ‘Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to Non-Fulfillment of Requirements for Redundancy (Workout Company)’
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, refusal of employment succession (termination of private consignment), restructuring, 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, “‘Extension of Probationary Period (Notice of Termination After Employee’s Refusal)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to refusal of employment succession (termination of private consignment) can be found at “List of Decisions Related to Refusal of Employment Succession (Termination of Private Consignment).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision in which the employee prevailed in full on the issue of “refusal of employment succession (termination of private consignment).”
Decision Committee: Jeju Regional Labor Relations Commission 2026Buhae80 ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026-05-21 · Result: Fully upheld (employee’s claim accepted in full)
Summary of key issues:
A. Whether a “dismissal” exists
Given that the employment contract did not contain any provision limiting the contract term to the consigned project period, that the employer took the initiative in proposing to the commissioning institution that the consigned project be privately outsourced, that the employer delivered a written notice explicitly stating “dismissal” (해고), not “termination of the employment contract,” to the employee one month before the decision on employment succession was made, and that the employer unilaterally notified the employee that even an employment relationship with an employee hired without a fixed term would automatically terminate upon the end of the consigned project, on the ground that the consigned project had ended, the Commission found that …
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
This case concerns whether the termination of an employment relationship between an employer performing a specific consigned project under a private consignment structure and an employee hired without a fixed term, on the ground of the termination of the consigned project, constitutes an unfair dismissal.
The employee, taking the position that his/her employment contract continued to exist even after the consigned project ended, filed an application for remedy for unfair dismissal with the Labor Relations Commission. The Jeju Regional Labor Relations Commission examined whether the dismissal was unfair and rendered a decision fully upholding the employee’s claim.
Labor Law Firm Law& wishes to emphasize that, in unfair dismissal disputes of this nature, it is crucial to prepare the Labor Relations Commission procedures and the legal theories relating to redundancy (collective dismissal) and employment succession with precision.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is:
“Whether, solely on the ground that the consigned project has ended, the employment relationship with an employee hired without a fixed term automatically terminates, or whether the employer’s act should be regarded as a dismissal, in which case it must satisfy the just cause and procedural requirements under the Labor Standards Act.”
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Findings
The decision panel in this case noted that there was no express provision in the employment contract limiting the contract term to the “consigned project period,” that the employer itself proposed to the commissioning institution that the consigned project be privately outsourced and thereby led the change in business structure, that the employer delivered a written notice of dismissal explicitly stating “dismissal” (해고), not “termination of the employment contract,” to the employee one month before the decision on employment succession was finalized, and that the employer unilaterally notified the employee that the employment relationship with an employee hired without a fixed term would also automatically terminate due to the end of the consigned project.
In light of these circumstances, the Commission determined that the employer’s action did not constitute a natural retirement arising from the mere expiration of the consignment contract, but rather a “dismissal” in which the employer unilaterally terminated the employment relationship regardless of the employee’s intent.
The Commission held that this dismissal was unfair, on the ground that the termination of a specific consignment contract, by itself, does not allow an employer to automatically discharge an employee hired without a fixed term, and that, absent satisfaction of the separate requirements for redundancy (collective dismissal), such dismissal is unjustified.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Employees working in private consignment or service contract projects should first carefully check how the contract term is stated in their employment contracts, and whether it is directly linked to the project period. Even if you are simply notified that your employment will “automatically terminate” due to the end of the project, the situation may in fact constitute a dismissal.
Accordingly, it is necessary to review and organize the contents and timing of the dismissal notice, as well as whether the employer took the initiative in changing the business structure, and to consider filing an application for remedy for unfair dismissal with the Labor Relations Commission.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, if you plan to change the structure of consigned/outsourced projects or to terminate private consignment, you must carefully examine whether you can satisfy the requirements for redundancy (collective dismissal) with respect to employees hired without a fixed term (managerial necessity, efforts to avoid dismissal, reasonable and fair selection criteria, good-faith consultation, etc.).
In particular, if the employment contract does not contain a clause linking the contract term to the project period, you should bear in mind that it is difficult to regard the employment relationship as terminated solely by using the expression “automatic termination upon project completion.”
To prevent unnecessary unfair dismissal disputes in cases of this type, employers should, in advance of any changes in private consignment or service contracts, establish measures for employment succession, assess the necessity and procedures for redundancy (collective dismissal), and set out the method of written dismissal notice. It is important to systematically manage the facts in a manner consistent with the relevant legal principles.
2. Matters Decided
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Whether a dismissal exists
Given that the employment contract did not contain any provision limiting the contract term to the consigned project period, that the employer took the initiative in proposing to the commissioning institution that the consigned project be privately outsourced, that the employer delivered a written notice explicitly stating “dismissal” (해고), not “termination of the employment contract,” to the employee one month before the decision on employment succession was made, and that the employer unilaterally notified the employee that the employment relationship with an employee hired without a fixed term would automatically terminate upon the end of the consigned project, on the ground that the consigned project had ended, it is recognized that a dismissal exists.
B. Whether the dismissal was justified
The termination of a specific consignment contract, by itself, does not constitute a natural retirement of an employee hired without a fixed term …
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Findings
A. Whether a dismissal exists
Given that the employment contract did not contain any provision limiting the contract term to the consigned project period, that the employer took the initiative in proposing to the commissioning institution that the consigned project be privately outsourced, that the employer delivered a written notice explicitly stating “dismissal” (해고), not “termination of the employment contract,” to the employee one month before the decision on employment succession was made, and that the employer unilaterally notified the employee that the employment relationship with an employee hired without a fixed term would automatically terminate upon the end of the consigned project, on the ground that the consigned project had ended, it is recognized that a dismissal exists.
B. Whether the dismissal was justified
The termination of a specific consignment contract, by itself, does not constitute a natural retirement of an employee hired without a fixed term … /
[See More Related Decisions]
- ‘Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to Expression of Intent to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’
- ‘Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to Dismissal of Application (Non-Appearance at Hearing)’ – Date of Decision: – Case Number: Dismissed
- ‘Unfair Dismissal Decision Relating to Non-Fulfillment of Requirements for Redundancy (Workout Company)’
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, refusal of employment succession (termination of private consignment), restructuring, 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, “‘Extension of Probationary Period (Notice of Termination After Employee’s Refusal)’ Unfair Dismissal Decision,” in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to refusal of employment succession (termination of private consignment) can be found at “List of Decisions Related to Refusal of Employment Succession (Termination of Private Consignment).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
