체류기간연장등불허가처분취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On May 26, 2015, the Plaintiff was staying in the Republic of Korea after having obtained permission to stay (F-6-1) on September 8, 2015 as a spouse’s qualification (F-6-1) from a national of the Republic of Korea on March 6, 198, and on May 26, 2015, the Plaintiff was staying in the Republic of Korea after having obtained permission to stay (F-6-1) for the period of stay on September 12, 2016 (the expiration of September 8, 2017).
B. On August 24, 2017, the Plaintiff applied for the extension of the sojourn period again to the Defendant. On August 31, 2017, the Defendant issued a departure order (hereinafter referred to as “instant departure order order”) ordering the Plaintiff to leave the Republic of Korea by September 14, 2017 on the ground that the Plaintiff’s status as a married woman of New Zealand (C; hereinafter referred to as “C”) was maintained up to the present date, and the requirements for marriage were not satisfied, and that “the lack of authenticity of marriage” was denied.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, evidence 8, Eul evidence 6 and 8 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the marriage is in accordance with Islamic Law in Pakistan does not enter into a marriage without reporting the marriage to the State. The marriage is merely a de facto marriage where the marriage was not reported without reporting the marriage to the State in accordance with Islamic Law. Thus, the latter marriage does not constitute a de facto marriage, because it is merely a de facto marriage where the marriage was not reported without reporting the marriage to the State in accordance with Islamic Law.
Even if a former marriage falls under a legal marriage, not a de facto marriage, the Plaintiff’s divorce is resolved by either making a bilateral agreement or declaring an “sloping” according to the method of divorce as prescribed by the Islamic Rate Act. Thus, the latter marriage does not fall under the latter divorce.
Therefore, the divorce constitutes a middle divorce.