출국금지처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim that is changed in exchange in the trial is dismissed.
2. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The contents of the Plaintiff’s assertion in the trial of the first instance do not differ significantly from the contents of the Plaintiff’s assertion in the trial of the first instance, and even if the Plaintiff’s assertion is examined closely with the evidence submitted in this court and the first instance court, the fact-finding and determination in the first instance
Therefore, the reasoning for the instant court’s judgment regarding the instant case was as follows: (a) ① 2/10 of the judgment of the first instance court was extended to May 12, 2016; (b) 2/13-15 of the two pages to November 8, 2017; and (c) on November 3, 2017, the period for prohibition of departure against the Plaintiff was extended from November 9, 2017 to May 8, 2018.
(1) The term “instant disposition” means “as of November 8, 2017,” and “as of May 8, 2018, the term of prohibition of departure on November 3, 2017 is extended to May 8, 2018, and the term of prohibition of departure on May 1, 2018 is extended to November 8, 2018. On November 6, 2018, the term of prohibition of departure on Plaintiff was extended from November 9, 2018 to May 8, 2019 (hereinafter “instant disposition”). (3) The term “Evidence 1 through 3” in two pages 2, 16, and 17, as of May 3, 2017, and as of May 1, 2018, the term “Evidence 1 through 3” is as prescribed in the main sentence of Article 8(2) of the Civil Procedure Act, and as of January 2, 2018, the same reasons as the judgment of the court.”
2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim that was changed in exchange at the trial of the party is dismissed as it is without merit (the old lawsuit was withdrawn from the exchange change at the trial and the judgment of the court of first instance became null and void). It is so decided as per Disposition.