체류기간연장등불허가처분취소
1. The Defendant’s disposition of denying the extension of sojourn period, etc. against the Plaintiff on July 26, 2013 is revoked.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The plaintiff was a national of the People's Republic of China, after completing the marriage report with a national B of the Republic of Korea on December 27, 2005, and entered the country as a marriage immigration (F-6) on June 18, 2006.
B. Around June 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for changing the status of stay to permanent residence. However, the Defendant, following a fact-finding survey, ordered the Plaintiff to leave the Republic of Korea until August 9, 2013, when the Plaintiff denied the change of status of stay on July 26, 2013 due to lack of authenticity of marriage, etc.
(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] A] A without dispute, Gap 1 through 5, the purport of the entire pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. 1) The Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s spouse B are remarried. B divorced with the former spouse in around 1998, and exchanged for two marrieds only among the former spouse. 2) B lived with the Plaintiff for about two months after the Plaintiff’s entry, and around August 2006, B operated the marina business with the Plaintiff’s aid in the vicinity of Incheon City City.
3) B discontinued the business of marina business and worked at the construction site from around 2007, and around March 2013, He had been engaged in construction business at the Yeongdeungpo-gun Power Plant. 4) From around 2007 when he suspended the business of marina business, B was unable to live together with the Plaintiff and B from around 2007 to the present.
However, in this Court, B testified that economic difficulties and B did not live together due to the continuous shift of work, but they have continuously been harming married life by finding the plaintiff on the date of the break.
5 The report on the investigation of the current situation against the plaintiff by the defendant is indicated as follows:
- The plaintiff has been in the neighboring Emba site business place since June 3, 2012 while residing in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul in Eunpyeong-gu.
B is residing in the F of the Vindication-gun and work in the construction site for the field of the construction of the Heungjin-gun.
- The plaintiff lived with B around 2006 for a period of two months, and B.