[Case Information] This case is a decision in which the employee prevailed in full on the issue of “expectation of contract renewal (conversion from dispatch to fixed-term).” Decision date: 2026-09-07 · Decision body: Jeonbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission · Case No.: 2026부해298 Key issue summary: A. Whether the employee had been converted into a worker with an indefinite-term employment contract. Based solely on the submitted materials and statements, it is difficult to ascertain the facts regarding the alleged illegal dispatch. Even if illegal dispatch were to be recognized, it cannot be concluded that an employment contract with no fixed term was immediately formed between the parties. 1. Legal Implications Ⅰ. Case Overview This unfair dismissal case concerns a situation where the employer converted a dispatched worker, who had been engaged in regular and continuous duties, into a fixed-term employee and later refused to renew the employment contract, leading to a dispute before the Labor Relations Commission. The Jeonbuk Regional Labor Relations Commission focused its review on (i) whether an employment contract with no fixed term had been formed, (ii) whether the employee had acquired an expectation of contract renewal, and (iii) whether the reasons for refusing renewal were reasonable. It ultimately upheld the employee’s application. Ⅱ. Summary of Issues The issues in this case are whether, “even if an employment contract with no fixed term was not formed between the parties, the Labor Relations Commission can recognize the employee’s ‘expectation of contract renewal’ that arose from the repeated renewal practices in relation to regular and continuous duties, and whether the employer’s asserted reason of workforce restructuring alone constitutes a reasonable ground for refusing renewal.” Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning The panel in this case found that: there was a substantial practice whereby the employer hired dispatched workers, who had been engaged in regular and continuous administrative support work, as fixed-term employees, then repeatedly renewed their contracts following periodic evaluations, and converted them to regular employees upon satisfaction of certain conditions; in the course of this practice, trust necessarily formed with respect to contract renewal and conversion to regular employment; the employee’s evaluation scores were excellent, and thus there was no fault attributable to the employee that would justify termination of the contract; and the employer’s asserted “personnel structure of separately operating dispatched and fixed-term staff” amounted merely to an internal personnel management circumstance and could not readily be regarded as an objective and reasonable ground for refusing renewal. Accordingly, the Commission held that the employee had an expectation of contract renewal, and that, despite this, terminating the employment contract upon expiry of the term without reasonable grounds in substance constituted unfair dismissal. [Connection Between the Commission’s Reasoning and Legal Principles] Relying on the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on the expectation of contract renewal, the Commission examined, in a comprehensive manner, the content and formation process of the employment contract, the existence and operation of criteria and procedures for renewal, the regular and continuous nature of the duties, and the practice of repeated renewals, to determine whether a “legitimate expectation that the contract would continue to be renewed or converted upon satisfaction of certain conditions” had been formed. The Commission also applied the established case law principle that, where an expectation of renewal is recognized, an employer refusing renewal must demonstrate that the reasons for refusal are, in light of social norms, objective and reasonable, taking into account factors such as the business’s purposes and circumstances, the employee’s status and duties, the objectivity and fairness of evaluation standards and procedures, and the existence of any fault attributable to the employee. The burden of proof in this regard lies with the employer. Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective) Employees should carefully organize and retain evidence showing: whether they have continued to work for a long period through repeated renewals in regular and continuous duties despite the presence of a fixed term in the contract; whether the company has maintained evaluation and conversion criteria under which employees scoring above a certain level are ordinarily re-contracted or converted to regular employment; and whether their own evaluation results were objectively excellent. Where such materials and practices support the employee’s position, even if the employer adopts the form of termination upon expiry of the contract term as a means of workforce reduction, there is a significant possibility of challenging the infringement of the expectation of renewal through an unfair dismissal relief application to the Labor Relations Commission. Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer’s Perspective) From the employer’s standpoint, if regular and continuous duties have long been performed by dispatched or fixed-term workers, and if repeated renewals and conversions to regular employment have been carried out as a matter of practice, there is a high risk that expectations of renewal and expectations of conversion to indefinite-term contracts will effectively be formed. Where the use of fixed-term personnel is unavoidable, employers should clearly set out the criteria and procedures for renewal and conversion in work rules or internal guidelines, and retain records showing that evaluations were conducted objectively and fairly in accordance with those criteria. Employers should also bear in mind that blanket refusals to renew based solely on internal circumstances such as workforce restructuring may be found to constitute unfair dismissal. As illustrated above, the legal principles on the expectation of contract renewal in the context of unfair dismissal are a very important issue in the practice of the Labor Relations Commissions. Conducting a prior review of personnel and labor structures with advice from a specialized institution such as Labor Law Firm Law& can be of great help in preventing disputes. 2. Matters Decided A. Case Overview and Procedural History This is a case in which the Commission held that, although an employment contract with no fixed term could not be deemed to have been formed between the parties, the employee’s expectation of contract renewal was recognized, and the termination of the employment contract upon expiry of the term without reasonable grounds for refusing renewal constituted unfair dismissal. 3. Gist of the Decision A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning A. Whether the employee had been converted into a worker with no fixed term Based solely on the submitted materials and statements, it is difficult to ascertain the facts regarding the alleged illegal dispatch. Even if illegal dispatch were to be recognized, it cannot be concluded that an employment contract with no fixed term was immediately formed between the parties. B. Whether an expectation of contract renewal existed There was a substantial practice whereby the employer hired dispatched workers, who had been engaged in regular and continuous duties, as fixed-term employees and then periodically evaluated them and renewed their contract terms (or converted them to regular employment). It can therefore be considered that trust was formed that the employment contract would be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions, and an expectation of renewal is recognized. C. Whether there were reasonable grounds for refusing renewal The employee’s evaluation scores by the employer were excellent, and thus it cannot be said that there was any fault attributable to the employee. The employer asserted, as a reasonable ground for refusing renewal, its personnel structure of operating administrative support staff separately as dispatched or fixed-term workers, but this assertion is difficult to accept. [See More Related Decisions] - “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Remedial Interest · Refusal to Rehire (Post-Retirement Fixed-Term Employment)’” - “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Business Necessity (Reassignment of Cleaning Staff)’” - “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Expectation of Employment Succession (Competitive Bidding for Logistics Center)’” [Tags] Unfair dismissal, expectation of contract renewal (dispatch → fixed-term conversion), 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. ※ The previous article, “Unfair Dismissal Case on ‘Extinction of Remedial Interest (Three-Month Probationary Facility Manager)’,” can be viewed in a new window. ※ A list of decisions related to the expectation of contract renewal (dispatch → fixed-term conversion) can be found in the “List of Decisions on Expectation of Contract Renewal (Dispatch → Fixed-Term Conversion).” ※ Korean version of this case: Korean article