The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

A. Article 4(1) of the Act on the Protection, etc. of Fixed-Term and Part-Time Workers (hereinafter “ Fixed-Term Act”) provides that “An employer may hire a fixed-term worker within the extent not exceeding two years (where a fixed-term employment contract is renewed repeatedly, the total period of his/her continuous employment does not exceed two years).” The proviso to paragraph (1) provides that “If an employer employs a fixed-term worker for more than two years despite the absence or extinguishment of the grounds under the proviso to paragraph (1), the fixed-term worker shall be deemed an employee who has concluded an employment contract without a fixed period of time.”

Even in a case where a labor contract is concluded with a fixed period of time, if certain requirements are met, notwithstanding the expiration of the term of the labor contract, employment rules, collective agreement, etc., or if there is no such provision in light of various circumstances surrounding the labor contract, the trust between the parties to the labor contract is formed that the labor contract will be renewed if certain requirements are met, and the right to expect that the labor contract will be renewed accordingly is recognized, the employer’s refusal of the renewal of the labor contract is invalid as it is unfair, and the labor relationship after the expiration of the term of the employment is the same as the renewal of the previous labor contract.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Du45765, Nov. 10, 2016). Taking into account the purpose of protecting fixed-term workers under the fixed-term law, the effect of the employer’s unfair rejection of renewal, etc., workers are actually working due to the employer’s unfair rejection of renewal.