1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

The plaintiff is a foreigner of the nationality of the Republic of Austria (hereinafter referred to as "Naria") who entered the Republic of Korea on May 29, 2016 under the short-term visit (C-3) sojourn status, and applied for refugee status on June 8, 2016, and is currently staying in the Republic of Korea upon obtaining permission for change of status on May 30, 2016 as other (G-1) sojourn status.

On June 28, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision to recognize refugee status to the Plaintiff. Accordingly, on July 4, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on July 4, 2016, but was dismissed on October 27, 2016, the Defendant filed an administrative litigation (2017Gudan3895) seeking the revocation of the decision to recognize refugee status with this court on January 25, 2017.

On the other hand, the Defendant issued a deportation order to the Plaintiff pursuant to Articles 46(1)1 and 3, 7(1), and 11(1)3 and 4 of the Immigration Control Act on July 5, 2016 on the grounds that the fact that the entry or departure inspection of the Plaintiff’s passport was forged due to the discovery of the identification results by the Incheon Airport Immigration Office (hereinafter “instant deportation order”), and on the same day, pursuant to Articles 51 and 63 of the Immigration Control Act, the Defendant issued a deportation order to the Plaintiff pursuant to Articles 51 and 63 of the Immigration Control Act (hereinafter “the instant deportation order”).

(hereinafter “instant protection order”). D.

On December 14, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the instant deportation order with the Minister of Justice, but was dismissed on January 5, 2016.

【Ground of Recognition】 The entries in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and Eul Nos. 1 through 7, and the purport of the entire pleadings, and the purport of the entire argument, as to whether the pertinent deportation order and the pertinent protective order are legitimate, are not by the Plaintiff’s return to the Plaintiff, but by the entry or departure seal affixed on the Plaintiff’s passport. Article 7(1) of the Immigration Control Act does not contain any content as to the foreigner’s entry into the Republic of Korea.