[Case Information] This case is a decision in which the employer ultimately prevailed (claim dismissed) on the issue of “agreement on contract term (signature on the third employment contract).” Date of decision: 2026-09-04 · Labor Relations Commission: Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission · Case No.: 2026Buhae2573 Key issues in summary: (i) The third employment contract executed on 19 January 2026 expressly stated that the employment period was from 1 January 2026 to 28 February 2026, contained a clause abolishing the previous employment contracts, and was personally signed by the employee in this case; (ii) in light of the contents of the KakaoTalk messages the employee sent to the employer in this case, it was difficult to find that the employee was entirely unaware that, unlike before, the contract term had been changed to end on 28 February 2026; … 1. Legal Implications Ⅰ. Case Overview This case concerns whether an employer’s refusal to further renew a fixed-term employee’s contract after the expiry of the agreed term constitutes an unfair dismissal. The Gyeonggi Regional Labor Relations Commission focused its review on the validity of the final employment contract and whether an expectation of renewal (gyeongsin-gidae-gwon) could be recognized. It ultimately held that the employer’s action did not amount to an unfair dismissal, but rather to a termination of the employment relationship by expiry of a valid fixed-term contract. Ⅱ. Issues The issue in this case is whether, “where the third employment contract expressly shortens and fixes the contract term, the employee can still assert an expectation of renewal of the employment contract and characterize the contract expiry as an unfair dismissal.” Ⅲ. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning The decision panel in this case noted that the third employment contract concluded on 19 January 2026 specified the employment period as running from 1 January 2026 to 28 February 2026, included a clause abolishing the previous employment contracts, and was personally signed by the employee; that, in light of the contents of the KakaoTalk messages sent by the employee to the employer, it was difficult to conclude that the employee had not recognized at all that the contract term had been changed to end on 28 February 2026; and that there was no objective evidence to suggest that the employee’s manifestation of intent was defective due to fraud, duress, or similar conduct by the employer. On this basis, the panel held that the “dismissal” in this case did not constitute a “dismissal” in the legal sense, but rather an automatic retirement resulting from the expiry of a valid fixed-term employment contract. In addition, there were no provisions in the employment contract, work rules, or operating regulations stating that the employment contract would automatically be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions, and the employee’s period of service was only about three months, such that no practice of repeated renewals had been established. Taking these factors together, and in light of the Supreme Court’s requirements for recognizing an expectation of renewal (a relationship of trust formed through various circumstances such as the contract terms, the circumstances of its conclusion, and the practice and procedures of renewal), the Commission found it difficult to recognize an expectation of renewal on the part of the employee. Ultimately, this case is a representative example, as organized by Labor Law Firm Law&, of a lawful termination by expiry of term rather than an unfair dismissal. Ⅳ. Practical Points (From the Employee’s Perspective) Where the employment contract specifies a term and, in particular, contains language such as “the previous contract is abolished,” that document will serve as the key basis governing the future employment relationship. Even if the contract term is stated as relatively short, once you have signed and sealed the contract, it will be very difficult to assert an expectation of renewal in the absence of separate provisions guaranteeing renewal or circumstances such as long-term repeated renewals. If you do not fully understand the meaning of the contract presented by the employer or have not received a proper explanation, you should, before signing, clearly confirm the contract period and the possibility of renewal via text message, email, or similar means, and preserve such communications as evidence. Ⅴ. Practical Points (From the Employer/Company’s Perspective) From the employer’s perspective, it is important that the final employment contract with a fixed-term employee clearly state the contract period, whether renewal is possible, and the effect of prior contracts (including whether they are abolished), and that there be records showing that the employee understood these contents (such as explanatory materials or messenger conversations). It is advisable not to include ambiguous language in the employment contract, work rules, or operating regulations that could be interpreted as “automatic renewal upon satisfaction of certain conditions,” and instead to clearly state that any renewal will be determined separately at the company’s discretion based on staffing needs and a separate review process. If there has been a practice of repeatedly renewing employment contracts, the company should, from a certain point, establish and announce in advance its policy and criteria for no longer renewing such contracts, in order to prevent unnecessary disputes over expectations of renewal. 2. Matters Decided A. Case Overview and Procedural History This is a case in which the effectiveness of the final employment contract concluded between the parties was recognized, and the employee was found not to have an expectation of renewal of the employment contract, leading to the conclusion that the employment relationship terminated upon expiry of the contract term. 3. Summary of the Decision A. Summary of the Labor Relations Commission’s Reasoning (1) The third employment contract concluded on 19 January 2026 expressly stated that the employment period was from 1 January 2026 to 28 February 2026, contained a clause abolishing the previous employment contracts, and was personally signed by the employee in this case; (2) in light of the contents of the KakaoTalk messages the employee sent to the employer in this case, it is difficult to find that the employee was entirely unaware that, unlike the previous contract, the contract term had been changed to end on 28 February 2026, and there is no objective evidence to recognize that the employee’s manifestation of intent was defective due to fraud, duress, or similar conduct by the employer; (3) there are no provisions in the employment contract, work rules, or operating regulations to the effect that the employment contract will be renewed upon satisfaction of certain conditions, and the employee in this case worked for only about three months, with no history of repeated renewals of the employment contract. Considering these points in their entirety, it is difficult to recognize an expectation of renewal of the employment contract. [See More Related Decisions] - “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Business Necessity (Reassignment of Cleaning Staff)’ - “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Expectation of Succession of Employment (Competitive Bidding for Logistics Center)’ - “Unfair Dismissal Decision Concerning ‘Relief Interest and Refusal of Re-employment (Post-Retirement Fixed-Term Employment)’ [Tags] Unfair dismissal, agreement on contract term (signature on third employment contract), 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 Concerning ‘Non-Existence of Expectation of Renewal (No Practice of Open Recruitment and Indefinite-Term Contracts)’,” in a new window. ※ The list of decisions related to agreement on contract term (signature on third employment contract) can be viewed together in the “List of Decisions Related to Agreement on Contract Term (Signature on Third Employment Contract).” ※ Korean version of this case: Korean article