Corporate trends / Performance record
Forced Voluntary Resignation (Resignation Letter as Condition for Wage Payment) – Unfair Dismissal Decision (Unfair Dismissal 597)
- Date2026/08/05 04:09
- Read 11
[Case Information]
This case is a decision that was concluded by upholding the first-instance decision on the issue of “forced voluntary resignation (resignation letter as condition for wage payment).”
Decision Committee: Central Labor Relations Commission 2025BuHae9532 ○ ○ ○ Application for Reconsideration of Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026-05-20 · Result: First-instance decision upheld
Summary of key issue: The worker argued that he did not even understand the meaning of a resignation letter, but was told that he would be paid his wages only if he wrote one, and that he reluctantly complied under coercion, so the resignation should be treated as an unfair dismissal. However, ① on 2025. . .
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this unfair dismissal case, the worker, in a situation of unpaid wages, wrote a resignation letter at the employer’s request and then filed an application for remedy for unfair dismissal with the Labor Relations Commission, and the matter proceeded up to the Central Labor Relations Commission. The worker claimed that he did not even understand the meaning of a resignation letter and that he reluctantly wrote it because he was told, “You must write a resignation letter to receive your wages.” The employer, on the other hand, argued that the worker voluntarily resigned. As in many other voluntary resignation and redundancy cases handled by Labor Law Firm Law&, the central issue in this case was whether the resignation letter reflected the worker’s true intention.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether a resignation letter written in a situation of unpaid wages, where the employer demands “you must write a resignation letter to receive your wages,” is invalid as having been written under coercion, or whether it should be regarded as a voluntary resignation based on the worker’s true intention, such that it does not constitute an unfair dismissal.
The decision panel in this case noted that: ① the worker personally wrote the resignation letter on 15 September 2025; ② in the resignation letter, he specifically stated the reason for resignation as “wages”; ③ he tore up the employment contract himself; ④ he had previously filed a wage arrears complaint with the Labor Office and, in this case as well, stated that he would report the matter to the Labor Office; and ⑤ despite having worked for less than one month, he received full payment of one month’s wages without any deduction for the four major social insurances.
In light of these circumstances, the panel found that the worker understood the nature of the resignation letter and submitted it as what he considered the best option for receiving his wages.
Summary of Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The Labor Relations Commission held that: ① the resignation letter was written in the worker’s own handwriting, and it expressly stated “Reason for resignation: wages”; ② the worker engaged in conduct premised on termination of the employment relationship, such as tearing up the employment contract; ③ given his prior experience filing a wage arrears complaint and his statement that he would “report to the Labor Office,” it was difficult to view him as being completely unaware of labor law and the structure of wage arrears; and ④ in reality, despite having worked for less than one month, he received full payment of one month’s wages without any deduction for the four major social insurances, indicating that the resignation and wage payment had been negotiated as a package.
On this basis, the Commission concluded that the employer had not obtained the resignation letter through coercion in order to effect a dismissal, but rather that the worker, fully aware of the meaning of resignation, chose voluntary resignation as a means to receive his wages.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective)
When a worker writes a resignation letter in a situation of unpaid wages and later wishes to contest it as a “resignation under coercion,” it is necessary to have evidence and testimony showing the specific circumstances of pressure or threats at the time, and that the resignation did not reflect the worker’s true intention. If the worker personally writes the reason for resignation on the resignation letter and engages in conduct premised on ending the relationship, such as tearing up the employment contract, there is a high likelihood that the Labor Relations Commission will later find that the separation was a voluntary resignation rather than an unfair dismissal. Accordingly, workers should refrain from hastily submitting a resignation letter.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, using statements such as “you must write a resignation letter to receive your wages” as a means of resolving unfavorable circumstances like wage arrears carries a high risk that, in a subsequent unfair dismissal dispute, the worker will allege coercion or threats. Where a resignation is necessary, employers should clearly document the resignation form, the circumstances of its preparation, and the details of wage and four-major-insurance settlements, and should refine procedures so that it is objectively evident that the worker fully understood the meaning of resignation and voluntarily submitted the resignation letter.
In disputes involving this type of resignation letter or voluntary resignation, the decisive factor is how meticulously the facts and evidence are organized to support whether the expression of intent to resign was genuine. This should always be borne in mind in practice.
2. Matters Decided
a. Case Overview and Procedural History
The worker argued that he did not even understand the meaning of a resignation letter, but reluctantly wrote one because he was told that he would be paid his wages only if he did so, and that this amounted to an unfair dismissal because the letter was written under coercion. However, in light of ① the fact that he personally wrote the resignation letter on 15 September 2025; ② the fact that he stated “wages” as the reason for resignation in the letter; ③ the fact that he tore up the employment contract; ④ the fact that he had prior experience filing a wage arrears complaint with the Labor Office and stated that he would report the matter to the Labor Office; and ⑤ the fact that, although he had not worked a full month, he received full payment of one month’s wages without any deduction for the four major social insurances, it was found that the worker in this case understood the resignation letter and submitted it as what he considered the best option for receiving his wages, and …
3. Gist of the Decision
a. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The worker argued that he did not even understand the meaning of a resignation letter, but reluctantly wrote one because he was told that he would be paid his wages only if he did so, and that this amounted to an unfair dismissal because the letter was written under coercion. However, in light of ① the fact that he personally wrote the resignation letter on 15 September 2025; ② the fact that he stated “wages” as the reason for resignation in the letter; ③ the fact that he tore up the employment contract; ④ the fact that he had prior experience filing a wage arrears complaint with the Labor Office and stated that he would report the matter to the Labor Office; and ⑤ the fact that, although he had not worked a full month, he received full payment of one month’s wages without any deduction for the four major social insurances, it was found that the worker in this case understood the resignation letter and submitted it as what he considered the best option for receiving his wages, and … /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Expression of Intention to Resign (Resignation Statement in Telephone Call)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision
- “Dismissal of Case (Non-Appearance at Hearing)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision – Decision date: – Case number: Dismissed
- “Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, forced voluntary resignation (resignation letter as condition for wage payment), 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&.
※ The previous article, “Mandatory Retirement (Early Resignation Notice by Secretary-General)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision, can be viewed in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to forced voluntary resignation (resignation letter as condition for wage payment) can be found in the “Forced Voluntary Resignation (Resignation Letter as Condition for Wage Payment) – Related Decisions” list.
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a decision that was concluded by upholding the first-instance decision on the issue of “forced voluntary resignation (resignation letter as condition for wage payment).”
Decision Committee: Central Labor Relations Commission 2025BuHae9532 ○ ○ ○ Application for Reconsideration of Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
2026-05-20 · Result: First-instance decision upheld
Summary of key issue: The worker argued that he did not even understand the meaning of a resignation letter, but was told that he would be paid his wages only if he wrote one, and that he reluctantly complied under coercion, so the resignation should be treated as an unfair dismissal. However, ① on 2025. . .
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this unfair dismissal case, the worker, in a situation of unpaid wages, wrote a resignation letter at the employer’s request and then filed an application for remedy for unfair dismissal with the Labor Relations Commission, and the matter proceeded up to the Central Labor Relations Commission. The worker claimed that he did not even understand the meaning of a resignation letter and that he reluctantly wrote it because he was told, “You must write a resignation letter to receive your wages.” The employer, on the other hand, argued that the worker voluntarily resigned. As in many other voluntary resignation and redundancy cases handled by Labor Law Firm Law&, the central issue in this case was whether the resignation letter reflected the worker’s true intention.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether a resignation letter written in a situation of unpaid wages, where the employer demands “you must write a resignation letter to receive your wages,” is invalid as having been written under coercion, or whether it should be regarded as a voluntary resignation based on the worker’s true intention, such that it does not constitute an unfair dismissal.
The decision panel in this case noted that: ① the worker personally wrote the resignation letter on 15 September 2025; ② in the resignation letter, he specifically stated the reason for resignation as “wages”; ③ he tore up the employment contract himself; ④ he had previously filed a wage arrears complaint with the Labor Office and, in this case as well, stated that he would report the matter to the Labor Office; and ⑤ despite having worked for less than one month, he received full payment of one month’s wages without any deduction for the four major social insurances.
In light of these circumstances, the panel found that the worker understood the nature of the resignation letter and submitted it as what he considered the best option for receiving his wages.
Summary of Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The Labor Relations Commission held that: ① the resignation letter was written in the worker’s own handwriting, and it expressly stated “Reason for resignation: wages”; ② the worker engaged in conduct premised on termination of the employment relationship, such as tearing up the employment contract; ③ given his prior experience filing a wage arrears complaint and his statement that he would “report to the Labor Office,” it was difficult to view him as being completely unaware of labor law and the structure of wage arrears; and ④ in reality, despite having worked for less than one month, he received full payment of one month’s wages without any deduction for the four major social insurances, indicating that the resignation and wage payment had been negotiated as a package.
On this basis, the Commission concluded that the employer had not obtained the resignation letter through coercion in order to effect a dismissal, but rather that the worker, fully aware of the meaning of resignation, chose voluntary resignation as a means to receive his wages.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective)
When a worker writes a resignation letter in a situation of unpaid wages and later wishes to contest it as a “resignation under coercion,” it is necessary to have evidence and testimony showing the specific circumstances of pressure or threats at the time, and that the resignation did not reflect the worker’s true intention. If the worker personally writes the reason for resignation on the resignation letter and engages in conduct premised on ending the relationship, such as tearing up the employment contract, there is a high likelihood that the Labor Relations Commission will later find that the separation was a voluntary resignation rather than an unfair dismissal. Accordingly, workers should refrain from hastily submitting a resignation letter.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective)
From the employer’s standpoint, using statements such as “you must write a resignation letter to receive your wages” as a means of resolving unfavorable circumstances like wage arrears carries a high risk that, in a subsequent unfair dismissal dispute, the worker will allege coercion or threats. Where a resignation is necessary, employers should clearly document the resignation form, the circumstances of its preparation, and the details of wage and four-major-insurance settlements, and should refine procedures so that it is objectively evident that the worker fully understood the meaning of resignation and voluntarily submitted the resignation letter.
In disputes involving this type of resignation letter or voluntary resignation, the decisive factor is how meticulously the facts and evidence are organized to support whether the expression of intent to resign was genuine. This should always be borne in mind in practice.
2. Matters Decided
a. Case Overview and Procedural History
The worker argued that he did not even understand the meaning of a resignation letter, but reluctantly wrote one because he was told that he would be paid his wages only if he did so, and that this amounted to an unfair dismissal because the letter was written under coercion. However, in light of ① the fact that he personally wrote the resignation letter on 15 September 2025; ② the fact that he stated “wages” as the reason for resignation in the letter; ③ the fact that he tore up the employment contract; ④ the fact that he had prior experience filing a wage arrears complaint with the Labor Office and stated that he would report the matter to the Labor Office; and ⑤ the fact that, although he had not worked a full month, he received full payment of one month’s wages without any deduction for the four major social insurances, it was found that the worker in this case understood the resignation letter and submitted it as what he considered the best option for receiving his wages, and …
3. Gist of the Decision
a. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The worker argued that he did not even understand the meaning of a resignation letter, but reluctantly wrote one because he was told that he would be paid his wages only if he did so, and that this amounted to an unfair dismissal because the letter was written under coercion. However, in light of ① the fact that he personally wrote the resignation letter on 15 September 2025; ② the fact that he stated “wages” as the reason for resignation in the letter; ③ the fact that he tore up the employment contract; ④ the fact that he had prior experience filing a wage arrears complaint with the Labor Office and stated that he would report the matter to the Labor Office; and ⑤ the fact that, although he had not worked a full month, he received full payment of one month’s wages without any deduction for the four major social insurances, it was found that the worker in this case understood the resignation letter and submitted it as what he considered the best option for receiving his wages, and … /
[See More Related Decisions]
- “Expression of Intention to Resign (Resignation Statement in Telephone Call)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision
- “Dismissal of Case (Non-Appearance at Hearing)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision – Decision date: – Case number: Dismissed
- “Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, forced voluntary resignation (resignation letter as condition for wage payment), 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&.
※ The previous article, “Mandatory Retirement (Early Resignation Notice by Secretary-General)” – Unfair Dismissal Decision, can be viewed in a new window.
※ A list of decisions related to forced voluntary resignation (resignation letter as condition for wage payment) can be found in the “Forced Voluntary Resignation (Resignation Letter as Condition for Wage Payment) – Related Decisions” list.
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
