Corporate trends / Performance record
Unfair Dismissal Precedent Concerning “Expectation of Contract Renewal (Contract Employee Performance Evaluation)” (Unfair Dismissal 604)
- Date2026/08/07 04:15
- Read 8
[Case Information]
This case is a precedent in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “expectation of contract renewal (contract employee performance evaluation).”
Adjudicating Body: Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission
Case No. 2026부해2717 – ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2026-07-20 · Outcome: Dismissed
Summary of Key Issues:
A. Whether an expectation of renewal can be recognized with respect to a contract employee’s employment contract
(1) The collective agreement provides that “where a contract employee’s performance evaluation score is 60 points or higher, the employer may make the final decision on whether to renew the contract.”
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, a contract employee’s fixed-term contract had been renewed several times on the basis of performance evaluations. When the employer refused to renew the contract relying on the performance evaluation result for a particular year, the employee filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission, claiming that this constituted unfair dismissal.
The Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission rendered its decision focusing on (i) whether an expectation of renewal could be recognized in relation to the contract employment, based on the collective agreement and the actual renewal practice, and (ii) whether the reasons for refusing renewal were reasonable. In doing so, the Commission整理ed the legal principles governing unfair dismissal and the operation of fixed-term and contract employment.
Among the many unfair dismissal and redundancy dismissal cases handled by Labor Law Firm Law&, this decision is particularly significant in practice, as it illustrates relatively clearly the analytical framework for determining an expectation of renewal for contract employees.
Ⅱ. Issues
The issue in this case is whether, under a collective agreement and a repeated practice of performance evaluations and contract renewals, an expectation of renewal can be recognized for a contract employee, and, if so, whether the employer’s subsequent refusal to renew the employment contract constitutes unfair dismissal.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case found that an expectation of renewal could be recognized for the employee’s contract employment, given that: (i) the collective agreement expressly sets out the criteria for renewal of contract employees (performance evaluation score of 60 points or higher), (ii) the employee had in fact received scores of 60 points or higher in three performance evaluations and the contract had been renewed on each such occasion, and (iii) the employer had applied the same performance evaluation criteria to other contract employees in deciding whether to renew their contracts.
However, even where an expectation of renewal is recognized for fixed-term or contract employment, case law and commentary consistently hold that the employer may refuse renewal if there is a “reasonable cause” that can be regarded as appropriate under social norms. In this case as well, the decisive criterion was whether there existed grounds justifying the refusal to renew, such as the content of the employee’s 2026 performance evaluation, job performance ability, work attitude, and satisfaction of qualification requirements. On the premise that such grounds were established, the application for remedy was dismissed.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
From the employee’s standpoint, it should be borne in mind that an expectation of renewal may be recognized where the criteria for renewal of the employment contract are specified in the collective agreement, rules of employment, or employment contract, and there is a repeated practice of renewal in accordance with those criteria.
However, even if an expectation of renewal is recognized, it will be difficult for a refusal to renew to be found to constitute unfair dismissal where there are reasonable grounds such as a significantly low recent performance evaluation result, failure to meet qualification requirements, repeated neglect of duties, or deterioration in safety or service quality.
Accordingly, contract and fixed-term employees should regularly check their performance evaluation criteria and scores, as well as the specific reasons reflected in the evaluation. If they consider that the evaluation content is inconsistent with the facts or discriminatory, they should leave a record of any objections. Such records can serve as important defensive material in future Labor Relations Commission remedy proceedings.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, it is essential to recognize that where the criteria for renewal of contract and fixed-term employees are specified in the collective agreement or HR regulations and are applied consistently in practice, there is a higher likelihood that an expectation of renewal will be recognized in favor of the employee.
Even so, if the employer intends to refuse renewal, it will be easier to have the legitimacy of that decision upheld before the Labor Relations Commission if the employer can concretely prove reasonable grounds—such as insufficient job performance, poor work attitude, or failure to meet qualification requirements—through objective materials such as performance evaluation sheets, interview records, and written warnings.
In addition, the conditions and procedures for renewal, and the evaluation criteria, should be clearly set out in the employment contract, rules of employment, and collective agreement, and procedural fairness should be ensured by, for example, notifying employees of evaluation results and providing an opportunity to explain. This helps prevent unnecessary unfair dismissal disputes and, where disputes do arise, provides a foundation for systematically constructing a defense strategy with the assistance of experts such as Labor Law Firm Law&.
2. Matters Adjudicated
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Whether an expectation of renewal can be recognized for the contract employment
(1) In light of the following: (i) the collective agreement expressly provides that “where a contract employee’s performance evaluation score is 60 points or higher, the employer may make the final decision on whether to renew the contract,” (ii) since joining the company in 2022, the employee received a score of 60 points in three performance evaluations and the employment contract was renewed on each occasion, and (iii) the employer determines whether to renew the contracts of other contract employees through performance evaluations as well, an expectation of renewal can be recognized with respect to the employee’s contract employment.
B. Whether there exist reasonable grounds for refusing to renew the employment contract
(1) The employee’s 2026 performance evalua…
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
A. Whether an expectation of renewal can be recognized for the contract employment
(1) In light of the following: (i) the collective agreement expressly provides that “where a contract employee’s performance evaluation score is 60 points or higher, the employer may make the final decision on whether to renew the contract,” (ii) since joining the company in 2022, the employee received a score of 60 points in three performance evaluations and the employment contract was renewed on each occasion, and (iii) the employer determines whether to renew the contracts of other contract employees through performance evaluations as well, an expectation of renewal can be recognized with respect to the employee’s contract employment.
B. Whether there exist reasonable grounds for refusing to renew the employment contract
(1) The employee’s 2026 performance evalua… /
[See More Related Precedents]
- “‘Non-Formation of Hiring Decision (Absence of Offer Letter)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent” – Decision date: – Case outcome: Initial decision upheld
- “‘Expression of Intention to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent”
- “‘Appropriateness of Disciplinary Sanction (Violation of Public Institution Ethics Rules)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expectation of renewal (contract employee performance evaluation), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, performance evaluation · poor performance, 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 Precedents” series.
※ The previous article, “‘Appropriateness of Disciplinary Sanction (Violation of Public Institution Ethics Rules)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent,” can be viewed in a new window.
※ The list of precedents related to expectation of renewal (contract employee performance evaluation) can be viewed together in the “Expectation of Renewal (Contract Employee Performance Evaluation) Precedent List.”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
This case is a precedent in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “expectation of contract renewal (contract employee performance evaluation).”
Adjudicating Body: Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission
Case No. 2026부해2717 – ○ ○ ○ Application for Remedy for Unfair Dismissal
Decision date: 2026-07-20 · Outcome: Dismissed
Summary of Key Issues:
A. Whether an expectation of renewal can be recognized with respect to a contract employee’s employment contract
(1) The collective agreement provides that “where a contract employee’s performance evaluation score is 60 points or higher, the employer may make the final decision on whether to renew the contract.”
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, a contract employee’s fixed-term contract had been renewed several times on the basis of performance evaluations. When the employer refused to renew the contract relying on the performance evaluation result for a particular year, the employee filed an application with the Labor Relations Commission, claiming that this constituted unfair dismissal.
The Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission rendered its decision focusing on (i) whether an expectation of renewal could be recognized in relation to the contract employment, based on the collective agreement and the actual renewal practice, and (ii) whether the reasons for refusing renewal were reasonable. In doing so, the Commission整理ed the legal principles governing unfair dismissal and the operation of fixed-term and contract employment.
Among the many unfair dismissal and redundancy dismissal cases handled by Labor Law Firm Law&, this decision is particularly significant in practice, as it illustrates relatively clearly the analytical framework for determining an expectation of renewal for contract employees.
Ⅱ. Issues
The issue in this case is whether, under a collective agreement and a repeated practice of performance evaluations and contract renewals, an expectation of renewal can be recognized for a contract employee, and, if so, whether the employer’s subsequent refusal to renew the employment contract constitutes unfair dismissal.
Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
The panel in this case found that an expectation of renewal could be recognized for the employee’s contract employment, given that: (i) the collective agreement expressly sets out the criteria for renewal of contract employees (performance evaluation score of 60 points or higher), (ii) the employee had in fact received scores of 60 points or higher in three performance evaluations and the contract had been renewed on each such occasion, and (iii) the employer had applied the same performance evaluation criteria to other contract employees in deciding whether to renew their contracts.
However, even where an expectation of renewal is recognized for fixed-term or contract employment, case law and commentary consistently hold that the employer may refuse renewal if there is a “reasonable cause” that can be regarded as appropriate under social norms. In this case as well, the decisive criterion was whether there existed grounds justifying the refusal to renew, such as the content of the employee’s 2026 performance evaluation, job performance ability, work attitude, and satisfaction of qualification requirements. On the premise that such grounds were established, the application for remedy was dismissed.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
From the employee’s standpoint, it should be borne in mind that an expectation of renewal may be recognized where the criteria for renewal of the employment contract are specified in the collective agreement, rules of employment, or employment contract, and there is a repeated practice of renewal in accordance with those criteria.
However, even if an expectation of renewal is recognized, it will be difficult for a refusal to renew to be found to constitute unfair dismissal where there are reasonable grounds such as a significantly low recent performance evaluation result, failure to meet qualification requirements, repeated neglect of duties, or deterioration in safety or service quality.
Accordingly, contract and fixed-term employees should regularly check their performance evaluation criteria and scores, as well as the specific reasons reflected in the evaluation. If they consider that the evaluation content is inconsistent with the facts or discriminatory, they should leave a record of any objections. Such records can serve as important defensive material in future Labor Relations Commission remedy proceedings.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, it is essential to recognize that where the criteria for renewal of contract and fixed-term employees are specified in the collective agreement or HR regulations and are applied consistently in practice, there is a higher likelihood that an expectation of renewal will be recognized in favor of the employee.
Even so, if the employer intends to refuse renewal, it will be easier to have the legitimacy of that decision upheld before the Labor Relations Commission if the employer can concretely prove reasonable grounds—such as insufficient job performance, poor work attitude, or failure to meet qualification requirements—through objective materials such as performance evaluation sheets, interview records, and written warnings.
In addition, the conditions and procedures for renewal, and the evaluation criteria, should be clearly set out in the employment contract, rules of employment, and collective agreement, and procedural fairness should be ensured by, for example, notifying employees of evaluation results and providing an opportunity to explain. This helps prevent unnecessary unfair dismissal disputes and, where disputes do arise, provides a foundation for systematically constructing a defense strategy with the assistance of experts such as Labor Law Firm Law&.
2. Matters Adjudicated
A. Case Overview and Procedural History
A. Whether an expectation of renewal can be recognized for the contract employment
(1) In light of the following: (i) the collective agreement expressly provides that “where a contract employee’s performance evaluation score is 60 points or higher, the employer may make the final decision on whether to renew the contract,” (ii) since joining the company in 2022, the employee received a score of 60 points in three performance evaluations and the employment contract was renewed on each occasion, and (iii) the employer determines whether to renew the contracts of other contract employees through performance evaluations as well, an expectation of renewal can be recognized with respect to the employee’s contract employment.
B. Whether there exist reasonable grounds for refusing to renew the employment contract
(1) The employee’s 2026 performance evalua…
3. Summary of the Decision
A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning
A. Whether an expectation of renewal can be recognized for the contract employment
(1) In light of the following: (i) the collective agreement expressly provides that “where a contract employee’s performance evaluation score is 60 points or higher, the employer may make the final decision on whether to renew the contract,” (ii) since joining the company in 2022, the employee received a score of 60 points in three performance evaluations and the employment contract was renewed on each occasion, and (iii) the employer determines whether to renew the contracts of other contract employees through performance evaluations as well, an expectation of renewal can be recognized with respect to the employee’s contract employment.
B. Whether there exist reasonable grounds for refusing to renew the employment contract
(1) The employee’s 2026 performance evalua… /
[See More Related Precedents]
- “‘Non-Formation of Hiring Decision (Absence of Offer Letter)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent” – Decision date: – Case outcome: Initial decision upheld
- “‘Expression of Intention to Resign (Resignation Remark in Telephone Call)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent”
- “‘Appropriateness of Disciplinary Sanction (Violation of Public Institution Ethics Rules)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expectation of renewal (contract employee performance evaluation), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, performance evaluation · poor performance, 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 Precedents” series.
※ The previous article, “‘Appropriateness of Disciplinary Sanction (Violation of Public Institution Ethics Rules)’ Unfair Dismissal Precedent,” can be viewed in a new window.
※ The list of precedents related to expectation of renewal (contract employee performance evaluation) can be viewed together in the “Expectation of Renewal (Contract Employee Performance Evaluation) Precedent List.”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
