1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

On December 4, 2012, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea as a visiting foreigner with Chinese nationality (H-2), and changed the status of stay to the qualification of overseas Korean (F-4) on December 4, 2012.

On October 27, 2015, the Plaintiff was released from the Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office on the charge that “A person violated the Electronic Financial Transactions Act by transferring his/her e-mail card and its password connected to the passbook account under the Plaintiff’s name to an influence,” and (2) on May 15, 2017, the Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office issued a summary order on the charge that “A female under the age of 19 who assaults a female under the age of 30 on March 30, 2017” to the Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office, on the grounds that the victim did not want to be punished, and (3) on May 10, 2017, the Seoul Northern District Court (C) issued the summary order on the ground that “A person was provided with the Service with the charges by unlawful means on another person’s name and resident registration number on February 10, 2015 and received a fine of 160 won on the ground that he/she was unlawfully provided with another person’s resident registration number.”

On July 14, 2017, the Defendant issued a departure order ordering the Plaintiff to voluntarily depart from the Republic of Korea by August 13, 2017 pursuant to Articles 68(1)1, 46(1)3, and 11(1)3 of the Immigration Control Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

【In the absence of dispute, the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the instant disposition and the overall purport of the pleading of Gap’s Nos. 1, 3, 5, and Eul’s Nos. 1, 2, 7, 8, and 9, as well as the entire purport of the pleading. The Plaintiff did not have any explanation as to the specific grounds for the instant disposition from the Defendant, in addition to the issuance of the instant disposition from the Defendant. Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful in violation of Article 23(1) of the Administrative Procedures Act. 2) The Plaintiff’s act does not fall under Article 11(

3 The plaintiff lives faithfully after entering the Republic of Korea around January 2008.