출국명령처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On March 12, 2012, before the expiration of the period of sojourn, the Plaintiff entered the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as “China”), as a national of the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as “China”), and stayed in Korea on March 15, 2009, and returned to Korea on March 12, 2012, before the expiration of the period of sojourn, and returned to Korea on April 5, 2012 as a sojourn status for visiting employment (H-2), and thereafter, on February 20, 2013, the Plaintiff applied for extension of the period of sojourn on August 21, 2015.
B. In examining the Plaintiff’s application, the Defendant confirmed that the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year and six months for violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (hereinafter “instant crime”) on March 26, 2014 (hereinafter “instant crime”), and confirmed that the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on August 21, 2015, by applying Article 11(1)3 and 4, and Article 46(1)3 and 13 of the Immigration Control Act, taking into account the fact that the Defendant is a person subject to deportation or a Korean spouse, and the time for household adjustment is needed, the Defendant ordered to depart (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence No. 1, Evidence No. 1, Evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant crime occurred in the process of assaulting male victims of coffee shop, and the circumstance leading up to the occurrence of the instant crime is considered. Considering the fact that the instant crime was committed without previous conviction and wrong, and the victims are divided and partly responsible, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Plaintiff has insufficient intent and ability to respect the legal order of the Republic of Korea solely on the ground that the Plaintiff was subject to criminal punishment. The Plaintiff is living in Korea with his wife and her mother and her child by marriage with her mother and is supported by her family members while working as a construction worker, and Korean wife.