Corporate trends / Performance record
Decision on Unfair Dismissal Relating to “Expression of Intent to Resign (Telephone Conversation)” (Unfair Dismissal 613)
- Date2026/08/10 04:19
- Read 3
1. Legal Implications
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, after the employee expressed an intention to terminate the employment relationship during a telephone conversation with the employer, the employee filed for relief with the Labor Relations Commission, alleging unfair dismissal. The Jeonbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission examined, focusing on the content and circumstances of the calls, whether there had been a dismissal, or whether the employment relationship had ended due to the employee’s voluntary resignation or by mutual agreement.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether, in a situation where the employer said, “I don’t think I can keep working with you,” and the employee responded over the phone, “Then I guess I should sort things out, I should step down,” this can be regarded as an unfair dismissal, or whether it should be viewed as termination of the employment relationship due to the employee’s expression of intent to resign.
Ⅲ. Key Points of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
The panel in this case noted that the employer first said, “I don’t think I can keep working with you,” to which the employee replied, “Yes, I understand. I understand what you’re saying.” Thereafter, when the employer asked, “So what would you like me to do for you?” the employee took the initiative and expressed an intention to terminate the employment relationship by saying, “Then I guess I should sort things out.” On the same day, during a subsequent call, when the employer asked, “How are you thinking of sorting this out?” the employee again clearly expressed an intention to resign by saying, “Then I guess I should step down.”
In light of these facts, the panel held that there was no dismissal in this case, and that the employment relationship had ended due to the employee’s voluntary expression of intent to resign and the employer’s acceptance thereof. Accordingly, it found no need to further examine the remaining issues, such as payment of wages in lieu of unfair dismissal, which presuppose the existence of an unfair dismissal, and dismissed the employee’s application for relief.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Employees should be aware that if they clearly express termination of the employment relationship in a phone call or conversation—using phrases such as “I’ll sort this out,” “I’ll step down”—this may be recognized as an expression of intent to resign even in the absence of a written resignation letter. Even if resignation is mentioned impulsively in a heated emotional situation, once the employer accepts it, the situation may be evaluated as resignation or mutual termination rather than dismissal, making it difficult to obtain relief for unfair dismissal. Therefore, any intention to resign should be expressed only after sufficient consideration and with due caution.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, where an employee orally expresses an intention to resign, it is advisable to secure objective evidence such as call recordings, text messages, or messenger records, so that these can be used as proof in any future unfair dismissal dispute. In addition, since the Labor Relations Commission strictly examines whether the expression of intent to resign was based on the employee’s free and genuine will, and whether there was any coercion or pressure, employers should clearly document the explanation process and circumstances, especially in situations linked to redundancy dismissals or personnel measures, to avoid any misunderstanding that the resignation was induced.
This decision of the Jeonbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission on unfair dismissal illustrates how fine the line can be in practice between unfair dismissal and resignation or mutual termination. To prevent disputes in similar cases, both employees and employers should pay particular attention to the expressions used in their conversations and to keeping appropriate records.
(ⓒ2026 copyright. Labor Attorney Moon Young-seop, Labor Law Firm Law&. Unauthorized reproduction and redistribution are prohibited.)
2. Matters Decided
a. Case Overview and Procedural History
… When the employer said, “I don’t think I can keep working with you,” the employee replied, “Yes, I understand. I understand what you’re saying,” and when the employer then asked, “So what would you like me to do for you?” the employee first expressed an intention to terminate the employment relationship by saying, “Then I guess I should sort things out.” On the same day, at 19:24, during another call with the employer, when the employer asked, “How are you thinking of sorting this out?” the employee again clearly expressed an intention to terminate the employment relationship by saying, “Then I guess I should step down.” In view of this, there is no fact that the employer dismissed the employee. Therefore, there is no need to further examine the remaining issues, which presuppose such dismissal.
3. Summary of Decision
a. Key Points of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
… When the employer said, “I don’t think I can keep working with you,” the employee replied, “Yes, I understand. I understand what you’re saying,” and when the employer then asked, “So what would you like me to do for you?” the employee first expressed an intention to terminate the employment relationship by saying, “Then I guess I should sort things out.” On the same day, at 19:24, during another call with the employer, when the employer asked, “How are you thinking of sorting this out?” the employee again clearly expressed an intention to terminate the employment relationship by saying, “Then I guess I should step down.” In view of this, there is no fact that the employer dismissed the employee. Therefore, there is no need to further examine the remaining issues, which presuppose such dismissal. /
[More Related Decisions]
- “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Scope of Legal Application (Fewer than 5 Regular Employees)’”
- “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Telephone Conversation – Statement of Intention to Leave)’”
- “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expression of intent to resign (telephone conversation), 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, “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Justifiability of Transfer (Transfer to Meat Section)’,” can be viewed in a new window.
※ A list of decisions relating to expression of intent to resign (telephone conversation) can be found under “List of Decisions Relating to Expression of Intent to Resign (Telephone Conversation).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
Ⅰ. Case Overview
In this case, after the employee expressed an intention to terminate the employment relationship during a telephone conversation with the employer, the employee filed for relief with the Labor Relations Commission, alleging unfair dismissal. The Jeonbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission examined, focusing on the content and circumstances of the calls, whether there had been a dismissal, or whether the employment relationship had ended due to the employee’s voluntary resignation or by mutual agreement.
Ⅱ. Summary of Issues
The issue in this case is whether, in a situation where the employer said, “I don’t think I can keep working with you,” and the employee responded over the phone, “Then I guess I should sort things out, I should step down,” this can be regarded as an unfair dismissal, or whether it should be viewed as termination of the employment relationship due to the employee’s expression of intent to resign.
Ⅲ. Key Points of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
The panel in this case noted that the employer first said, “I don’t think I can keep working with you,” to which the employee replied, “Yes, I understand. I understand what you’re saying.” Thereafter, when the employer asked, “So what would you like me to do for you?” the employee took the initiative and expressed an intention to terminate the employment relationship by saying, “Then I guess I should sort things out.” On the same day, during a subsequent call, when the employer asked, “How are you thinking of sorting this out?” the employee again clearly expressed an intention to resign by saying, “Then I guess I should step down.”
In light of these facts, the panel held that there was no dismissal in this case, and that the employment relationship had ended due to the employee’s voluntary expression of intent to resign and the employer’s acceptance thereof. Accordingly, it found no need to further examine the remaining issues, such as payment of wages in lieu of unfair dismissal, which presuppose the existence of an unfair dismissal, and dismissed the employee’s application for relief.
Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective)
Employees should be aware that if they clearly express termination of the employment relationship in a phone call or conversation—using phrases such as “I’ll sort this out,” “I’ll step down”—this may be recognized as an expression of intent to resign even in the absence of a written resignation letter. Even if resignation is mentioned impulsively in a heated emotional situation, once the employer accepts it, the situation may be evaluated as resignation or mutual termination rather than dismissal, making it difficult to obtain relief for unfair dismissal. Therefore, any intention to resign should be expressed only after sufficient consideration and with due caution.
Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective)
From the employer’s perspective, where an employee orally expresses an intention to resign, it is advisable to secure objective evidence such as call recordings, text messages, or messenger records, so that these can be used as proof in any future unfair dismissal dispute. In addition, since the Labor Relations Commission strictly examines whether the expression of intent to resign was based on the employee’s free and genuine will, and whether there was any coercion or pressure, employers should clearly document the explanation process and circumstances, especially in situations linked to redundancy dismissals or personnel measures, to avoid any misunderstanding that the resignation was induced.
This decision of the Jeonbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission on unfair dismissal illustrates how fine the line can be in practice between unfair dismissal and resignation or mutual termination. To prevent disputes in similar cases, both employees and employers should pay particular attention to the expressions used in their conversations and to keeping appropriate records.
(ⓒ2026 copyright. Labor Attorney Moon Young-seop, Labor Law Firm Law&. Unauthorized reproduction and redistribution are prohibited.)
2. Matters Decided
a. Case Overview and Procedural History
… When the employer said, “I don’t think I can keep working with you,” the employee replied, “Yes, I understand. I understand what you’re saying,” and when the employer then asked, “So what would you like me to do for you?” the employee first expressed an intention to terminate the employment relationship by saying, “Then I guess I should sort things out.” On the same day, at 19:24, during another call with the employer, when the employer asked, “How are you thinking of sorting this out?” the employee again clearly expressed an intention to terminate the employment relationship by saying, “Then I guess I should step down.” In view of this, there is no fact that the employer dismissed the employee. Therefore, there is no need to further examine the remaining issues, which presuppose such dismissal.
3. Summary of Decision
a. Key Points of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision
… When the employer said, “I don’t think I can keep working with you,” the employee replied, “Yes, I understand. I understand what you’re saying,” and when the employer then asked, “So what would you like me to do for you?” the employee first expressed an intention to terminate the employment relationship by saying, “Then I guess I should sort things out.” On the same day, at 19:24, during another call with the employer, when the employer asked, “How are you thinking of sorting this out?” the employee again clearly expressed an intention to terminate the employment relationship by saying, “Then I guess I should step down.” In view of this, there is no fact that the employer dismissed the employee. Therefore, there is no need to further examine the remaining issues, which presuppose such dismissal. /
[More Related Decisions]
- “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Scope of Legal Application (Fewer than 5 Regular Employees)’”
- “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Expression of Intent to Resign (Telephone Conversation – Statement of Intention to Leave)’”
- “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Failure to Meet Requirements for Redundancy Dismissal (Workout Company)’”
[Tags]
Unfair dismissal, expression of intent to resign (telephone conversation), 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, “Decision on Unfair Dismissal Relating to ‘Justifiability of Transfer (Transfer to Meat Section)’,” can be viewed in a new window.
※ A list of decisions relating to expression of intent to resign (telephone conversation) can be found under “List of Decisions Relating to Expression of Intent to Resign (Telephone Conversation).”
※ Korean version of this case: Korean article
