2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The Plaintiff is a foreigner of Pakistanan nationality.

B. On July 12, 2008, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea as a non-professional employment (E-9) qualification. On April 13, 201, the Plaintiff was admitted to B, who was a national of the Republic of Korea, and obtained permission to change the status of stay to the qualification of visiting Dong (F-1) qualification after adoption to B.

C. On October 2014, the Plaintiff applied for the extension of the period of stay to the Defendant before the expiration of the stay period.

On January 15, 2015, the Defendant rejected an application for permission for extension of the said permission on the ground that “the Plaintiff is an adult who is not a Korean national, but a F-1 sojourn status is not recognized as inevitable as a result of fact-finding surveys (hereinafter “instant disposition”).”

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 4, 5, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The defendant extended the period of stay three times after the plaintiff was permitted to stay in the capacity of F-1 (F-1), and the defendant changed his attitude without any special change in circumstances. This is obvious that the plaintiff's legitimate trust is infringed and thus it is against the principle of protection of trust and protection. 2) The plaintiff's legitimate adoption of the plaintiff lawfully constitutes the status of sojourn for visiting and living with his family.

In addition, as Grade III disability, there is a need for the plaintiff to live together with him and to assist in economic activities.

In addition, there is no risk of harm to the public interest due to the extension of the period of sojourn for the plaintiff.

Nevertheless, the instant disposition taken on the premise that the Plaintiff does not comply with the sojourn status condition of the F-1 (F-1) is an illegal disposition that misleads the Plaintiff of facts that form the basis thereof or deviates from or abused discretion by violating the principle of proportionality.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

(c)the legal nature of the extension of the period of one stay.