- within Employment and HR topic(s)
- with readers working within the Metals & Mining industries
- within Government, Public Sector, Antitrust/Competition Law and Wealth Management topic(s)
The new 2026 minimum wage in South Korea has been set and will take effect from 1 January 2026. We take a look at the details below, together with several other recent employment law developments, including two key government proposals and an important new supreme court decision.
New minimum wage for 2026
The Minimum Wage Council under the Ministry of Employment and Labor (MOEL) has set the 2026 minimum wage at KRW 10,320 per hour, a 2.9% increase from the current 2025 rate of KRW 10,030.
Based on the standard monthly calculation of 209 working hours, the monthly equivalent is KRW 2,156,880.
Government proposes a shift to the current employment-insurance coverage standard
MOEL has announced a draft amendment to the Employment Insurance Act that would replace the current working-hours-based eligibility standard for unemployment benefits with an income-based standard.
Under the current law in South Korea, if an employee works less than 15 hours per week on average (over four weeks), the employment period does not count towards eligibility for unemployment-insurance benefits. Under the proposed new law, once effective, they will be eligible regardless of working hours so long as their wages exceed a threshold to be established by regulation.
The change aims to address long-standing concerns that certain workers have remained uninsured due to the hours-based standard, despite meeting other legal criteria for coverage. By shifting to an income-based system and utilising national tax income data to identify uninsured workers, the amendment seeks to reduce coverage blind spots and strengthen worker protections.
The amendment is currently pending before the National Assembly.
Debate continues on raising the minimum mandatory retirement age
Although the government has clearly expressed its desire to raise the minimum mandatory retirement age from 60 to 65, a law has not yet been enacted. We expect that an increase in the minimum mandatory retirement age is very likely to occur. But there are currently several different bills under consideration at the National Assembly – including proposals for a phased increase over several years –and none have secured clear majority support at this stage.
Supreme Court holds that disciplinary action was void for excluding minority union
The Supreme Court has held that disciplinary action against a member of a minority union (i.e. a union representing a minority of employees) was void because the disciplinary-action committee lacked any member from the minority union.
South Korean law allows for multiple unions to represent employees at a single employer. But employers are entitled to bargain through a single channel unless they choose to bargain separately with different unions. If there is a union representing a majority of the employees, it is entitled to be the bargaining representative for other unions. If there is no majority union, there is a legally prescribed process for multiple unions to select unified bargaining representatives.
Under the company's CBA in this case, disciplinary action against a union member required a disciplinary action committee consisting of an equal number of representatives of management and labour; and the labour representatives were to be selected by the unified bargaining representatives: here, that was a majority union. In a disciplinary action against a member of a minority union, the majority union selected only members of its own union as labour representatives on the disciplinary-action committee.
The Supreme Court held that the employer and majority union appointing only members of the majority union as labour representatives on the disciplinary-action committee, without any members of the minority union which the disciplined employee belonged to, was discrimination against the minority union without reasonable grounds. This is a violation of the duty of fair representation absent special circumstances. Consequently, the relevant disciplinary action was deemed null and void due to this procedural defect.
In future disciplinary proceedings involving minority union members, where labour representatives are required to be appointed to the disciplinary-action committee, it will be necessary to ensure that those labour representatives include at least one person belonging to the disciplined employee's minority union.
Takeaway for employers
Employers should prepare for the 2026 minimum wage increase and monitordevelopments around the proposedshift in the employment-insurance coverage standard from hours-based to income-based and thedebateregardingthe mandatory retirement age. Additionally, and following the recent Supreme Court decision set out above, employers should ensure that disciplinary-action committees include representation from any minority union involved (where labour representatives are required to be appointed)to avoid potential procedural defects and legal challenges.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
