외국인근로자고용허가거부처분취소청구
2017Nu7154 Demanding revocation of the disposition of refusal to permit employment of foreign workers
Abdol Sable Abro, Inc.
Head of the Daegu Regional Employment and Labor Office Port Office
Daegu District Court Decision 2016Guhap23662 Decided September 13, 2017
May 18, 2018
June 22, 2018
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The defendant's rejection disposition against the plaintiff on November 11, 2016 is revoked.
1. Quotation of the first instance judgment
The reasoning for this Court’s reasoning is as follows, except for the addition of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows, and thus, the reasoning for this Court’s reasoning is as stated in the part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this Court’s reasoning is cited by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act
2. Details to be added; and
In the case of a party, the Plaintiff asserts that the basis provision of the instant disposition [the decision of the Foreign Human Resources Policy Committee (the Minister of Employment and Labor No. 2015-390, Dec. 23, 2015) made pursuant to the delegation of the Foreign Human Resources Employment Act] violates the freedom of occupation and violates the principle of equality, thereby infringing on the freedom of occupation and violating the principle of equality, and that, even if not, it should be strictly interpreted. The ground provision of the instant disposition cannot be applied to the Plaintiff, not the original contractor, and thus, there
However, in light of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as well as the case of the same kind (Seoul Administrative Court No. 2016Guhap80687 (Plaintiff's case) 15 March 2018, Seoul High Court 2017-72982 (Seoul High Court 2017-72982) - Supreme Court 2017Du72720 (Trial failure rejection), the provision of the ground of this case cannot be deemed to be unconstitutional, and it can be sufficiently recognized that the grounds of the disposition of this case exist, so the plaintiff's above assertion cannot be accepted.
3. Conclusion
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.
Service of the presiding judge;
Judges Kim Tae-tae
Judge Gyeong-man