출국명령처분취소
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. Quotation of the first instance judgment
A. The reasoning for this case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this case is cited by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
B. The plaintiff asserts that the disposition in this case was an excessive infringement of the plaintiff's private interest with a view to securing the abstract and unclear public interest, and that the above disposition was an abuse of discretion against the principle of proportionality.
However, in full view of various circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted by the first instance court cited earlier, namely, the details and method of the crime committed by the Plaintiff immediately after entering the Republic of Korea in 2006, the background leading up to the illegal stay between around one year and four months from 2007 to 2008, the details of the crime committed in violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, Etc., and the details of the crime committed in violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, the details of the crime committed in violation of the Act on the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the victim’s death resulting therefrom, etc., the Plaintiff’s act constitutes a case where there is considerable reason to deem that there is a concern for doing any act detrimental to the interest of the Republic of Korea or public safety, which is a reason for departure order under Article 11(1)3 of the Immigration Control Act, and the victim’s death resulting therefrom.
Although the defendant constitutes a person subject to deportation under Article 46 (1) 13 of the Immigration Control Act because the plaintiff was sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment, he/she seems to have ordered the plaintiff to voluntarily depart from the Republic of Korea in lieu of the compulsory departure order.
The plaintiff is likely to re-enter the Republic of Korea through the revocation of entry prohibition system.
The immigration control administration is to properly control and coordinate the entry and departure of foreigners in Korea.