기간제 근로계약 갱신 거절권의 제한

Recent changes in legal principles surrounding judicial precedents related to fixed-term employment contract are noteworthy. Judicial courts adhere to the principle that renewal of fixed-term employment contract is at the discretion of the employer, whereas they try to expand the scope of its exception. According to existing judicial precedents, if the contract period was only a matter of formality given various circumstances, even fixed-term employment contract was considered as unfixed-term employment contract, thus the employer’s veto on renewal of the contract could be governed by the Employment Protection Legislation. But, judicial courts put strict restrictions on the application of this principle to the cases related to the employer’s veto on renewal of fixed-term employment contract. Since 2004, however, there have been more court rulings that acknowledge fixed-term employment contract as unfixed-term employment contract. Judicial courts are also explaining that even though the contract period isn’t a matter of formality, there has to be "reasonable reasons" to make the employer's veto on renewal of contract effective, if continuous employment of the employee is expected given various circumstances. This legal principle of judicial precedent is still effective under the Fixed-term Employee Act that has taken effect since 2007.