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

A. The Plaintiff, as his/her nationality, entered the Republic of Korea with a short-term visa on November 2, 2010, and invested capital of KRW 100 million, and started food retail business with the trade name called "C" as of January 28, 201, Ansan-si Member B 301, and obtained permission for change from the Defendant on February 10, 201 to the status of business investment (D-8) sojourn.

B. On February 22, 2013, the Plaintiff applied for the extension of the period of stay to the Defendant on September 29, 2014 while staying for the change of the status of stay for trade management (D-9).

C. After conducting a fact-finding survey on the Plaintiff, on July 20, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision not to grant the extension of sojourn period (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s business activities were not normally performed and lack of authenticity in business management (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Evidence No. 2-1, and Evidence No. 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff continues to operate food retail business or food manufacturing business with the trade name of "C", and that the defendant did not properly grasp the facts while jointly operating "D," but contributed to the domestic economy, and the defendant's business performance was low, and thus, it is illegal to deny the extension of sojourn period, on the ground that the defendant did not properly grasp the facts and did not have sufficient business performance of the plaintiff's business performance.

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

C. Determination 1) Immigration Control Act (hereinafter “Act”)

In light of Article 10(1) of this Act, Articles 12 and 31(1) [Attachment 1] of the Enforcement Decree of the Act, and the form, language, etc. of the relevant provisions, permission for extension of status of stay should be granted to the applicant as a kind of permanent measure that grants the applicant the right to continue to stay in excess of the initial period of sojourn, and the permission-granting authority should grant the applicant the right to continue to stay in excess of the initial period of sojourn, taking