영주권불허처분등취소
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On May 14, 1994, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea with a visa for short-term (C-2) on a short-term visa on May 14, 1994, and entered the Republic of Korea for about 12 years, and completed a marriage report with B of the Republic of Korea on February 24, 2003, and applied for permission to change the status of stay to his spouse (F-2, at present, F-6-a) and obtained permission on November 6, 2006.
B. On June 17, 2009, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against B, such as divorce and consolation money, on the grounds of gambling, etc. (Seoul Family Court Decision 2009Da58626), and on November 24, 2009, the Plaintiff and B divorced from B on the ground of service by public notice to B, and on November 24, 2009, “The Plaintiff and B divorced.” As consolation money for the Plaintiff from August 21, 2009 to the day of full payment, B paid 20% interest per annum from August 21, 2009 to the day of full payment.” The Plaintiff and B divorced as the above judgment became final and conclusive on December 18, 2009.
Since then, the Plaintiff obtained permission to extend the period of stay until February 6, 2015 by changing the status of stay to a married single person (F-6-c).
C. On November 21, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for permission to change the status of stay in the capacity of permanent residence (F-5) on the ground that the Plaintiff constitutes “foreign Koreans who meet the requirements for acquisition of nationality.” However, on February 23, 2015, the Defendant rejected the change of the status of stay on the ground that “any other reasons, such as failure to perform good behavior, lack of proof of the full return of the spouse, etc.”
(hereinafter “instant No. 1 Disposition”) D.
On January 13, 2015, the Plaintiff again requested the Defendant to extend the period of stay as a spouse’s status of stay (F-6-c). However, on March 6, 2015, the Defendant denied the extension of the period of stay on the grounds that “the spouse’s failure to prove his/her former liability, etc.” was “other reasons.”
(hereinafter referred to as “instant Disposition 2”). [Ground of recognition] / Each entry in Gap’s Evidence 1 through 3, Eul’s Evidence 1, 2, 6 through 9 (including additional numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. On the grounds delineated below, the first and second dispositions of this case are rendered.