2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

A. The Plaintiff is the representative director of one Paly Pasi Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “One Pasi”), an international marriage broker which completed the registration pursuant to Article 4 of the Marriage Brokers Business Management Act (hereinafter “Marriage Brokers Business Act”).

B. On April 20, 2014, one Pasi entered into an international marriage brokerage agreement with Nonparty 1, and around May 2014, one Pasi acting as an international marriage broker between Nonparty 1 and Uzbekistan.

C. On August 24, 2015, the Defendant notified the Commissioner of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Police Agency of the fact that one of the results of the “joint guidance check and control by related agencies with respect to international marriage brokers” did not provide personal information of foreign women prior to the arrival of the international marriage brokers to the users of the international marriage brokers. The Defendant disposed of one of the instant documents on the ground that one did not provide personal information prior to the arrival of the first part of Article 3-2(3) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Marriage Brokers Business Act (amended by Act No. 14405, Dec. 20, 2016; hereinafter “former Marriage Brokers Business Act”), Article 10-2(1) of the former Marriage Brokers Business Act, Article 3-2(3) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Marriage Brokers Business Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27751, Dec. 30, 2016; hereinafter “former Enforcement Decree of the Marriage Brokers Business Act”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Relevant statutes;

The entries in the attached Table-related statutes are as follows.

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Article 10-2(1) of the former Marriage Brokers Business Act (hereinafter “Act”) provides an international marriage broker with personal information (including evidential documents; hereinafter the same shall apply) such as health conditions, etc. to the user of the international marriage broker and the other party. Article 10-2(4) of the same Act delegates the timing, etc. of providing personal information to the Presidential Decree. According to this delegation, the provision of this case stipulates that the time of providing personal information is “the first transfer to the South and North Korea.” Meanwhile, Article 18(1)9 of the Act provides that an international marriage broker may order the suspension of business, etc. in cases where he/she fails to provide personal information to the user and the other party in violation of Article 10-2(1) of the Act. According to the above Act and subordinate statutes, an international marriage broker shall provide personal information prior to the first date to the user and the other party, and if not, he/she

The facts that Han Man-don did not provide personal information prior to the first maturity while mediating the international marriage between Nonparty 1 and Nonparty 2 of Uzbekistan’s nationality, are not disputed between the parties, and the Defendant was given the instant disposition in accordance with the above statutes on the grounds of this, as seen earlier.

As long as Article 10-2(4) of the Act delegates the time to provide personal information to Presidential Decree, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the provision of this case is not a violation of the above Act, if the provision of personal information is provided even after the first full delivery, is not acceptable, unless the provision of this case provides personal information before the first full delivery.

B. However, the provision of this case limits the time of providing personal information of international marriage brokers to the first south transfer, so that the provision of personal information can be subject to sanctions, such as business suspension, etc., even in cases where the personal information is provided after the first expiration of the marriage. Therefore, whether such restrictions are within the scope of delegation by the mother law.

The purpose of Article 10-2(1) of the Act is to prevent damage to the choice of a spouse that may arise from international marriage by providing personal information on the part of the user and the other party and allowing the international marriage broker to decide whether to marry based on such information. The provision of this case is intended to ensure the reliability of international marriage by allowing the user to provide personal information in advance prior to the expiration of the period of time to ensure the reliability of international marriage by allowing the other party to decide whether to marry immediately after departure from the Republic of Korea by selecting the other party through pictures, etc.

However, in full view of the arguments in Gap evidence 6, 7, and 8, and evidence 10-2 of Gap evidence 10-2, although it is difficult to provide non-party 1 with personal information on the other party's health condition before the first male and female, it is hard to explain that personal information on the other party's health condition should be provided to the other party who filed an application for marriage report, and in the process of the examination, Uzbekistan proposed to undergo an international marriage brokerage with the other female without being provided with brokerage service fees (the foreigner is also free of charge, and the foreigner is also applicable) and the marriage report should not be reported if the non-party 1 is judged inappropriate, and it can be recognized that non-party 2 provided the non-party 1 with the non-party 1 with the domestic marriage brokerage agreement after being provided with the non-party 2 with the non-party 1 with the non-party 1 with the non-party 1 with the domestic marriage brokerage agreement. However, the non-party 1 provided the non-party 2 with the non-party 1 with the domestic marriage intermediary 2.

As seen earlier, the provision of personal information in Article 10-2(1) of the Act aims to prevent damage that may be caused by international marriage by requiring users, etc. to decide whether to marry based on personal information, etc. However, the provision in this case uniformly sets out the timing of providing personal information as “the first south transfer.” As seen in this case, personal information on health conditions, etc. may be provided free of charge or without particular expenses prior to marriage pursuant to the statutes or systems of a foreign country, and where a marriage can be achieved at the same time, personal information on health status, etc. may be provided after the first expiration of the first time, even if the personal information on health status can be provided after the lapse of the first time.

The instant provision is intended to ensure a user, etc.’s right right freedom of choice. However, if a user, etc. sufficiently explains the circumstances, etc. that a part of personal information on health conditions, etc. may be provided after the first passage of time due to foreign statutes or institutions, etc., and allows a user, etc. to be provided with personal information from the first expiration of time to the final marriage decision after the first expiration of time to decide whether to provide personal information, it is difficult to view that a user, etc. was negligent in the protection of users, etc., on the ground that a user, etc.’s personal information was delayed after the first expiration of time to provide personal information according to his/her decision.

On the other hand, the provision of this case is likely to cause damage to international marriage brokers compared to the protection of public interest by being subject to a disposition of business suspension, etc. due to the first violation of the duty to provide personal information prior to marriage, even if all personal information has been provided after the first marriage, and the user or the other party has reached a sound family when they are married, and the international marriage broker who arranged the marriage has reached the result of faithfully performing the international marriage brokerage duty.

Ultimately, the instant provision imposes an obligation on an international marriage broker to provide personal information on a user and the other party by not later than the first day after the first day without considering various circumstances, such as easiness of securing personal information, foreign institutions, laws and regulations, intentions of users, etc., actual provision of personal information, and progress after international marriage, and does not provide any exception or proviso to the provision. Therefore, it is erroneous in the misapprehension of the limitation of delegated legislation by stipulating that it exceeds the scope of Article 10-2(1) of the Act as the mother law, thereby deviating from the bounds of delegated legislation.

Therefore, the provision of this case is null and void, and the circumstances that personal information was not provided before the first maturity cannot be a ground for disposition. Thus, the disposition of this case must be revoked as unlawful.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is decided as per Disposition by admitting it.

[Attachment] Relevant Statutes: omitted

[Attachment 2] Detailed Criteria for Administrative Disposition (Related to Article 12): omitted

Judges Kim Jong-tae (Presiding Judge)