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

A. On June 23, 2016, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea as a foreigner of Vietnam’s nationality (D-4) status of general training (D-4), and applied for extension of sojourn period to the Defendant on December 20, 2016.

B. However, on February 20, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision not to permit the extension of sojourn period to the Plaintiff on grounds of insufficient financial capacity (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 6 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is not only that the Plaintiff has sufficient financial capacity to receive language training in the Republic of Korea, but also that there is no violation of the laws of the Republic of Korea, and that there is sufficient awareness that the Plaintiff has continuously been staying in the Republic of Korea and wanting to study in the Republic of Korea, and thus, the instant disposition is deemed unlawful.

B. Articles 10(1), 24(1), and 25 of the Immigration Control Act provide that a foreigner who intends to enter the Republic of Korea shall obtain the status of sojourn prescribed by Presidential Decree; a foreigner who intends to stay in the Republic of Korea shall obtain the permission to change his/her status of sojourn in advance; if the foreigner intends to continue to stay in excess of the period of sojourn, the foreigner shall obtain the permission to extend the period of sojourn from the Minister of Justice before the period of sojourn expires, as prescribed by Presidential Decree. Thus, the foreigner may stay only within the scope of the status of sojourn recognized at the time of initial entry and the period of sojourn; if the foreigner needs to continue his/her stay in the Republic of Korea, he/she shall obtain the permission to change his/her status of sojourn or the

b) the Commission;