In October 2022, following a fire at the Korea Optical Hi-Tech plant in Gumi, the company chose to liquidate its corporate entity. Consequently, 17 foreign workers who refused voluntary resignation were unilaterally dismissed. The dismissed workers have been staging a rooftop protest for 537 days, from January 2023 to the present, appealing that “the dismissal was unjust.”

They initiated legal action, arguing that foreign investment companies in Korea must also bear legal responsibility once they employ workers. However, the first instance court's judgment differed.

Court: “Dismissal Justified”…Union: “Ruling Based Only on Formality”

On June 27, 2025, the Seoul Administrative Court dismissed all lawsuits filed by the Metal Workers' Union and seven workers seeking the cancellation of reconsideration rulings for unfair dismissal and unfair labor practices. The court ruled that “Korea Nitto Optical, which succeeded the business, is a separate legal entity,” and that the dismissal was a “normal dismissal through proper procedures.”

This ruling has drawn criticism for being “based solely on formal corporate personhood.” Choi Hyun-hwan, head of the Korea Optical branch of the Metal Workers' Union, stated, “Our voices demanding rightful employment succession due to being a foreign-invested workplace were ignored, and the court effectively condoned the employer’s evasion of responsibility.”

Tak Seon-ho, the lawyer representing the workers, also criticized, “The court judged based only on the apparent corporate structure, disregarding the economic reality.” He added, “It did not hold accountable the circumstances where the Japanese parent company manipulated its corporate structure for relocation to avoid responsibility for domestic employment.”

Restructuring of Foreign-Invested Enterprises: A Signal of Permitted Exemption?

The workplace where the dismissed workers belonged continued to operate in a manner that effectively inherited the same operations and clients, yet legal succession was not recognized. In response, the Metal Workers' Union warned, “This ruling could set a precedent that justifies unfair restructuring and dismissals in foreign-invested companies.”

Indeed, this case is currently undergoing mediation proceedings at the ‘OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises National Contact Point (NCP)’ under the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy. A determination is underway to ascertain whether Japan's Nitto Denko, the parent company of Korea Nitto Optical, has fulfilled its worker responsibilities in accordance with international standards.

Experts point out the urgent need for the following institutional improvements:

• Strengthening legal responsibilities based on substantial employment succession during the restructuring of foreign-invested enterprises.

• Revising systems to include automatic employment succession when the same production and assets are inherited.

• Ensuring the effectiveness of domestic mediation and sanction systems for foreign-invested companies that do not comply with international standards.

Although the workers were dismissed, the results of their labor remain, still being used for the company's profits. The legal entity has changed, but the factory, the products, and the labor itself have not. If so, we ask:
Who should bear the responsibility for this labor?
For whom is this ruling, which condones “employment without responsibility,” intended?