Repeated "Write your resignation" by executive... Supreme Court: "Implied intention of dismissal"

1st and 2nd Instance Courts: "Accidental Expression, Only Coercion to Submit Resignation Letter"
Supreme Court: "Unilateral Declaration of Intent to Terminate Employment Relationship"

[Asia Economy Reporter Heo Kyung-jun] The Supreme Court has ruled that if a company executive repeatedly tells an employee to "submit a resignation letter" and neglects the employee's unauthorized absence from work despite hearing this, it constitutes an implicit dismissal.

The Supreme Court's Second Division (Presiding Justice Cheon Dae-yeop) announced on the 20th that it overturned the lower court's ruling, which had ruled against bus driver A in an appeal case to cancel the re-examination decision on unfair dismissal relief filed against the Central Labor Commission chairman, and remanded the case to the Daejeon High Court.

B, the manager of the management team at a chartered bus transportation company in Yeosu, Jeollanam-do, repeatedly told bus driver A in January 2020, who had unauthorizedly skipped a commuter bus, to "submit a resignation letter." When A asked, "Are you firing me?" B replied, "Yes." A did not come to work from the next day. Afterwards, A filed an unfair dismissal relief application with the local Labor Commission, which was dismissed, and the Central Labor Commission also dismissed the re-examination decision on the same grounds. Subsequently, A filed a lawsuit.

The first and second trials sided with the company, agreeing with the Central Labor Commission's judgment. They viewed B's statement to "submit a resignation letter" as an ‘incidental expression’ made in anger over A's rude behavior following the unauthorized absence, merely urging the submission of a resignation letter.

However, the Supreme Court's judgment differed. The court held that repeatedly telling someone to submit a resignation letter constitutes a unilateral expression of intent to terminate the employment relationship and cannot be regarded as a mere incidental expression.

The court stated, "Whether there was a dismissal by implicit expression of intent should be judged comprehensively by considering the circumstances and methods of the employer's refusal to accept labor, as well as the employee's attitude toward the refusal to accept labor."

Furthermore, considering that the employer only urged A to return to work after A filed an unfair dismissal relief application, the court found it highly likely that the employer approved or ratified the dismissal.

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