[Case Information] This case concerns a decision in which the employer prevailed (application dismissed) on the issue of “expectation of renewal (daily worker designated as fixed-term)” (갱신기대권) in a fixed-term employment context. Decision date: 2026-09-10 · Decision body: Jeju Regional Labor Relations Commission · Case No.: 2026부해156 Key issue summary: A. Whether the worker was a daily worker or a fixed-term worker Although the employment contract was titled “daily worker” and wages were set on a daily basis, the contract period was fixed for 5 days from 27 May 2025 to 31 May 2025, and no separate employment contract was concluded on a daily basis. 1. Legal Implications This unfair dismissal case, heard before the Jeju Regional Labor Relations Commission, concerns the expiry of a fixed-term worker’s contract and whether relief could be granted by the Labor Relations Commission. It is a case that offers many practical points of reference for Labor Law Firm Law& alongside the Commission’s reasoning. In particular, although the employment contract described the position as “daily worker,” the Commission treated the worker in substance as a fixed-term employee, yet still found that the employment relationship ended by expiry of the contract period rather than by a redundancy-type dismissal. Ⅰ. Case Overview The worker in this case signed an employment contract titled “daily worker” and was paid wages on a daily basis, but the actual contract period was set for 5 days, from 27 May 2025 to 31 May 2025. After the contract expired, the worker demanded to return to the worksite. When the employer refused, the worker applied to the Labor Relations Commission for relief, claiming that the employer’s refusal in effect constituted unfair dismissal. Ⅱ. Issues The issues in this case were: “Whether a short-term fixed-term worker, who is formally described as a daily worker, has a legitimate expectation of renewal of the employment contract (갱신기대권), and whether the employer’s refusal to accept the worker’s request to return to the worksite after expiry of the contract period constitutes unfair dismissal.” Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Decision The panel held that, notwithstanding the title of the employment contract and the wage structure, the worker was a fixed-term employee rather than a one-day-unit daily worker, given that the contract period was specifically set for 5 days, no separate contract was concluded for each day, and the wage payment date was set as the 28th of the following month. Taking into account that neither the employment contract nor the work rules contained any provision that the contract “must be renewed,” that the actual period of work was only two days with no history of repeated renewals, and that the mere fact that some workers worked beyond their contract period was insufficient to establish a uniform practice of renewal, the panel concluded that it was difficult to recognize an expectation of renewal (갱신기대권) for this worker. Accordingly, the fixed-term employment contract naturally terminated upon expiry of the contract period on 31 May 2025. In the absence of any premise of an expectation of renewal, there was no need to further examine whether the refusal to renew had a reasonable cause. The panel held that the employer’s refusal to accept the worker’s request to return to the worksite could not be regarded as a dismissal under the Labor Standards Act, and therefore rejected the worker’s unfair dismissal claim. Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Worker’s Perspective) In disputes over unfair dismissal involving fixed-term workers, it is crucial to keep in mind whether there were repeated renewals, practices, or rules sufficient to establish an “expectation of renewal” (갱신기대권). Where the period of employment is very short, there is no history of renewal, and there are no provisions in the contract, work rules, or collective agreements that presuppose renewal, it will be difficult to have a refusal to allow return to work after contract expiry recognized as a dismissal by the Labor Relations Commission. To protect your rights in similar situations, it is important to keep materials that can support the formation of an expectation of renewal, such as explanations received at the time of hiring, statements promising re-contracting, examples of repeated renewals, and the re-contracting practices of similarly situated workers. Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company Perspective) From the employer’s standpoint, when utilizing short-term fixed-term or daily-type labor, it is necessary to ensure that the actual mode of operation (whether it is truly daily work or a fixed-term arrangement for a defined period) is aligned with the wording of the documents. In addition, where fixed-term contracts are repeatedly renewed, employers should clearly set out the criteria and procedures for renewal in the work rules, contracts, and internal guidelines, and manage matters so that expressions that may be misunderstood as “until retirement age,” or broad re-employment practices, do not develop. Furthermore, where a structure exists in which an expectation of renewal may be recognized (such as repeated renewals or explicit/implicit promises of re-contracting), instead of uniformly terminating employment solely on the ground of “expiry of the contract period,” employers should, in advance, prepare reasonable grounds, procedures, and evaluation criteria equivalent to those for redundancy dismissals, and document the implementation process so that it can be substantiated. 2. Matters Decided A. Case Overview and Procedural History This is a case in which it was decided that the worker was a fixed-term employee but did not have an expectation of renewal, and that the employer’s refusal to accept the worker’s request to return to the worksite did not constitute a dismissal. 3. Gist of the Decision A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning A. Whether the worker was a daily worker or a fixed-term worker Although the employment contract was titled “daily worker” and wages were set on a daily basis, the contract period was fixed for 5 days from 27 May 2025 to 31 May 2025, and no separate employment contract was concluded on a daily basis. In addition, given that wages were to be paid on the 28th of the following month, the worker in this case is deemed to be a fixed-term worker rather than a one-day-unit daily worker. B. Whether an expectation of renewal of the employment contract is recognized and whether the refusal to renew had a reasonable cause The employment contract and work rules do not contain any provision that the employment contract must be renewed, the worker’s actual period of work was only two days, and there is no history of contract renewal. The mere fact that some workers continued to work beyond their contract period is insufficient to conclude that there was a uniform practice of renewal. Therefore, as no expectation of renewal (갱신기대권) is recognized, the panel did not proceed to determine whether there was a reasonable cause for refusal to renew, and held that the employment relationship terminated upon expiry of the contract period on 31 May 2025. [See More Related Decisions] - “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Interest in Relief · Refusal to Re-Employ (Post-Retirement Fixed-Term Employee)’” - “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Expectation of Succession of Employment (Competitive Bidding for Logistics Center)’” - “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Non-Formation of Hiring Commitment (Absence of Offer Letter)’” – Decision date: – Case No.: First-instance decision upheld [Tags] Unfair dismissal, expectation of renewal (daily worker designated as fixed-term), refusal to renew fixed-term contract, 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, “Unfair Dismissal Decision on ‘Non-Existence of Expression of Intent to Dismiss (Construction Site Closure Notice)’,” in a new window. ※ A list of decisions related to expectation of renewal (daily worker designated as fixed-term) can be found under “List of Decisions Related to Expectation of Renewal (Daily Worker Designated as Fixed-Term).” ※ Korean version of this case: Korean article