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

A. On November 3, 2004, the Plaintiff filed a marriage report with B, who is a Chinese national, who is a Korean national, and entered the Republic of Korea on February 20, 2005 as a marriage immigration status.

B. On May 27, 2009, the Plaintiff applied for naturalization on December 28, 2010, applied for a change of permanent residency on March 30, 2012, and on November 20, 2013, but was subject to a disposition of non-permission due to the authenticity of marriage and the uncertainty of maintaining marital life.

C. On August 17, 2014, the Plaintiff applied for extension of the period of stay for marriage immigration to the Defendant.

Accordingly, on October 30, 2014, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff from applying for extension of the period of stay on the ground that the Plaintiff “such as the absence of living conditions and the lack of authenticity of marriage,” etc. (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

【Unsatisfied Facts, Gap evidence 1 and Eul evidence 1】

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff maintains a normal marriage relationship with B who is a national of the Republic of Korea.

Although the plaintiff works as a domestic helper as a living problem, he or she has maintained a real marital relationship by drinking at the end of every week.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case from a different premise is unlawful.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. In light of the system’s comments, etc. under Article 25 of the Immigration Control Act and Articles 12 and 31 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, permission for extension of the period of stay constitutes a discretionary act in which the permitting authority determines whether to grant permission, in consideration of the applicant’s eligibility, purpose of stay, impact on public interest, etc., as the right to grant a new period of stay exceeding the original period of stay granted.

In particular, when a foreigner's spouse files an application for extension of the period of sojourn to continue to stay in excess of the period of sojourn, the permitting authority has a marital relationship without any reason attributable to the foreigner.