Law: "Even if a worker says 'I quit,' failure to provide written notice constitutes unfair dismissal"

[Asia Economy Reporter Seongpil Jo] A court ruling has determined that even if a worker verbally says "I quit" and storms out of the workplace, if the employer does not provide written notice in accordance with the Labor Standards Act, it constitutes unfair dismissal.

On the 4th, according to the legal community, the Seoul Administrative Court Administrative Division 3 (Presiding Judge Hwanwoo Yoo) ruled in favor of Mr. A in a lawsuit seeking cancellation of the reconsideration decision on unfair dismissal filed against the Central Labor Relations Commission. The court stated, "The termination of Mr. A's employment contract constitutes dismissal," and added, "The failure to provide written notice of the reasons and timing of dismissal as required by the Labor Standards Act is procedurally illegal, and the reconsideration decision must be canceled."

Last May, Mr. A had a verbal dispute with Mr. B, the actual operator of a bakery jointly represented by a married couple, and subsequently did not report to work at the bakery. When Mr. B said, "I cannot work with you" because he believed Mr. A was lying, Mr. A stormed out. Afterwards, Mr. A filed for relief and reconsideration with the local and central labor commissions, claiming unfair dismissal. After both applications were rejected, Mr. A filed a lawsuit in court.

The court ruled in favor of Mr. A. The court stated, "It is difficult to view Mr. A's expression of resignation as voluntary." After saying, "Why don't you just quit?" and storming out, Mr. A was still working in the bakery, but Mr. B told him not to work, which was judged to be the direct cause of Mr. A packing up and leaving the bakery. The court said, "The employer unilaterally terminated the employment contract against Mr. A's will."

A phone call between Mr. A and Mr. B after Mr. A left the bakery also supported this judgment. During the call, Mr. A explained several of his mistakes and repeatedly used the word "dismissal," which Mr. B did not deny. Rather, Mr. B explained the reasons for Mr. A's dismissal, effectively acknowledging the dismissal as a fact.

The court pointed out, "Mr. B officially ended the employment relationship by paying Mr. A 2 million won in wages just a few hours after Mr. A left the workplace," and added, "Although Mr. B claimed that the operation of the business was significantly disrupted because a replacement was not found for two months, no contact was made to ask Mr. A to return to work."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.