beta
Text
1. The judgment of the first instance court is modified in accordance with the purport of the claim amended by the trial court as follows.
In the lawsuit of this case.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding adding or using some contents, and deleting the part as stipulated in Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure
2. In addition or after addition, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, which is used in addition or after addition, is deleted from the 8th line, the following shall be added, and the 3th 9/10 line shall be added to the column of the grounds for recognition of the 3rd 9/10 line.
On August 17, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition to extend the period of prohibition of departure from August 21, 2016 to February 20, 2017 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
The following shall be added to the 3rd 10th son of the first instance judgment:
2. Of the instant lawsuit, where the effective period is specified in an administrative disposition regarding the legal nature of the part seeking revocation of the disposition ordering prohibition of departure from August 21, 2016 to October 12, 2016, the validity of such administrative disposition shall lose its validity due to the lapse of the pertinent period, unless there exist any special circumstances to deem that any legal interest is infringed upon due to the remainder of the said disposition after the lapse of the said period.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Du1946, Jul. 8, 2004). Of the instant disposition, the part ordering prohibition of departure from August 21, 2016 to October 12, 2016 among the instant disposition is for which the period has elapsed as of the date of the closing of argument in the trial, and as such, the part concerning the said disposition does not constitute the premise or requirement for a disadvantageous disposition against the Plaintiff that may not be future, and thus, there is no benefit to seek revocation of the disposition with respect to the said part.
Therefore, among the instant lawsuits, the revocation of the extension period of prohibition of departure from August 21, 2016 to October 12, 2016 is sought.