Coupang, an e-commerce company with its primary business in Korea, was found to have committed unfair labor practices in violation of Korea’s Trade Union Law and unfairly dismissed a worker in Korea in breach of the Korean Labor Standards Act. Coupang has been accused, on numerous occasions, of labor violations by foreign and domestic employees working for Coupang.
NOTE: For full disclosure, IPG Legal is engaged for cases against Coupang by executives working for Coupang in Korea. While IPG Legal is typically engaged by foreign companies doing business in Korea, IPG Legal also assists foreign executives in labor law matters in Korea, mainly against Coupang and Korean chaebols (conglomerates).
Coupang Unfair Dismissal & Unfair Labor Practices Case at Seoul Admin. Court
In a landmark Korean labor law and Korean Union Law decision, the Seoul Administrative Court (14th Division, Presiding Judge Lee Sang-deok) ruled on September 11, 2025, that Coupang Fulfillment Services (“CFS” or “Coupang” ) unlawfully refused to convert a temporary employee/union official from term employment to permanent employment. The Court found this conduct constituted unfair dismissal and an unfair labor practice under the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act of Korea. Coupang was represented by Kim & Chang Law Offices in this loss.
- The Plaintiff joined Coupang Fulfillment Services in December 2020 as a temporary worker at a logistics center. The Plaintiff performed receiving and shipping functions for Coupang. After renewing his fixed-term contract twice, the Plaintiff was evaluated for conversion to a permanent contract in October 2022. The Plaintiff received an employment evaluation below the threshold for conversion to a permanent contract. Coupang terminated Plaintiff’s employment effective November 30, 2022.
- Plaintiff served as head of the Bucheon branch of the Korean Public Service and Transport Workers’ Union. The union represents around 200 CFS workers. Coupang has been accused on several occasions of using evaluations to punish employees for asserting their employment rights.
- Gyeonggi Regional and the Central Labor Relations Commissions denied Plaintiff’s complaint for unfair dismissal and unfair labor practices.
- Plaintiff filed suit with the Seoul Administrative Court (Case No. 2023-guhap80005).
- The Seoul Administrative Court ruled in favor of the Plaintiff.
Seoul Administrative Court’s Holding against Coupang
The Seoul Administrative Court held, in part, that the employee had:
- A Legitimate Expectation of Conversion to permanent employment status;
- Coupang had an Anti-Union Bias and a Discriminatory Evaluation System; and
- Coupang Engaged in Unfair Labor Practices under Korea’s Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act of Korea.
1. Legitimate Expectation of Conversion
The Court held that the Plaintiff had a legitimate expectation of conversion from fixed-term employment to permanent employment, based on several key factors:
- Coupang’s job postings and employment contracts explicitly contemplated conversion review after 24 months of service.
- Plaintiff’s work was integral to Coupang’s ongoing logistics operations and was, thus, not temporary or project-based.
- Coupang’s internal “Regulations on Contract Management of Fixed-Term Employees” established concrete and detailed procedures and standards for conversion.
- The conversion rates (100% in 2020, 88.5% in 2021, 77% in 2022) demonstrated a consistent practice encouraging reliance on conversion to permanent employment.
The Seoul Administrative Court, thus, recognized that Plaintiff’s expectation of renewal and conversion from a Korean fixed-term contract to a permanent contract was objectively reasonable.
2. Coupang’s Anti-Union Bias & Discriminatory Evaluation System
Coupang justified its refusal to convert the Plaintiff to permanent employment by citing poor scores in “attendance,” “disciplinary record,” and “qualitative performance.” The Court rejected these grounds as a mere pretext that was irrational and discriminatory. The Court in Korea found, in part, that:
- Attendance deductions were primarily based on Plaintiff’s early departures for union duties, including union training, picketing, and meetings, most of which were approved and unpaid. The Court noted that treating those activities as absenteeism amounted to penalizing legitimate union activities, which is a clear violation by Coupang of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act of Korea.
- Plaintiff’s qualitative evaluation score fell dramatically after he became a union official (from 22/30 to 12/30) despite no evidence of deteriorating work performance. The Court inferred anti-union retaliation.
- The Court noted that, overall, the evaluation lacked objectivity, fairness, and transparency, rendering the termination unjustified and discriminatory and likely a mere labor-busting tactic.
3. Unfair Labor Practices under the Korean TULRA
The Court ruled that CFS’s actions constituted unfair labor practices under Article 81(1) Subparagraphs 1 and 4 of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act, which prohibit:
- Employer domination or interference with union activities; and
- Disadvantageous treatment of employees due to their union membership or activity.
By deducting attendance points for union participation and lowering qualitative scores tied to union involvement, Coupang interfered with lawful union operations and discriminated against a union leader. The Court therefore canceled the Central Labor Relations Commission’s prior decision and found in favor of the Plaintiff.
Coupang Anti-Union and Labor Law Violations
This ruling against Coupang aligns with a broader pattern of judicial and public scrutiny of Coupang’s labor practices. CFS and its parent company have faced repeated criticism for the use of temporary contracts, high-pressure working conditions, gaslighting of foreign employees to obtain “voluntary resignations,” and anti-union practices.
The Seoul Administrative Court’s decision against Coupang Fulfillment Services serves as a strong warning that employers cannot disguise anti-union discrimination under performance evaluations or contract-conversion assessments. In the eyes of Korean Courts, legitimacy requires both substantive fairness and procedural transparency. We will update the reader when more information becomes available.
IPG Legal Law Firm’s Korean Employment, Labor & Compensation Team
IPG Legal’s Employment, Labor & Compensation Practice Team is recognized as one of Korea’s leading labor law groups for advising both multinational companies and executives on complex labor, employment, and executive compensation matters. The team of lawyers provides comprehensive Korean legal services covering Korean employment contracts, workplace policies, disciplinary actions, collective bargaining, terminations, wage and working hour compliance, and employment disputes before Korean courts and administrative agencies. With extensive experience representing foreign employers and senior executives, IPG Legal’s lawyers deliver pragmatic, risk-focused guidance tailored to Korea’s rapidly evolving labor environment.