Hospital Director Who Claimed "Mutual Agreement" After Firing Internal Medicine Head Loses Unfair Dismissal Lawsuit

Stated Reason Differs from Actual Cause of Dismissal
Violation of Written Notice Requirement under the Labor Standards Act

Yonhap News Agency

A hospital manager unilaterally dismissed the head of the internal medicine department, then filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn a Central Labor Relations Commission ruling, claiming the departure was a “mutual agreement” or “voluntary resignation.” However, the manager lost the case.

According to the legal community on June 1, the 13th Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Jin Hyunseob) ruled against Mr. A, who operates a clinic in Eumseong County, North Chungcheong Province, in a lawsuit seeking to overturn the Central Labor Relations Commission’s decision on a request for relief from unfair dismissal, handing down a verdict in April dismissing the plaintiff’s claim.

In July 2024, Mr. A delivered a contract termination notice to Mr. B, who was working as the head of the internal medicine department at his hospital, citing “managerial reasons.” Objecting to this, Mr. B filed a petition for relief with the North Chungcheong Regional Labor Relations Commission, which sided with Mr. B, stating that the unilateral termination of the employment relationship constituted unfair dismissal. Mr. A appealed to the Central Labor Relations Commission, but his appeal was also dismissed for the same reasons.

Mr. A then filed a lawsuit, arguing that “Mr. B accepted the contract termination by proposing to change the resignation date and voluntarily resigned, and also received a severance payment of 6 million won as a result of the mutual agreement.”

However, the court did not accept Mr. A’s arguments.

The court stated, “After receiving the contract termination notice, Mr. B clearly protested, saying, ‘I am devastated that I was unilaterally notified of dismissal for managerial reasons and will pursue legal action.’ Adjusting the final working day was merely a follow-up measure to the dismissal notice and cannot be regarded as accepting a recommendation to resign or expressing an intention to resign voluntarily.”

Regarding the 6 million won paid by Mr. A, the court remarked, “This was merely compliance with the Ministry of Employment and Labor’s order to correct unpaid wages, and cannot be regarded as severance pay based on a mutual agreement.”

The court further pointed out, “Although Mr. A actually dismissed Mr. B for reasons such as ‘lack of work ability or insincere work attitude,’ he only cited ‘managerial reasons’ in the written notice, thereby violating the requirement under the Labor Standards Act to provide written notice of the reason for dismissal.” The court also added, “There is no evidence of urgent managerial necessity or that all efforts were made to avoid dismissal.”

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