(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.01.11 2016구단59594

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.01.11 2016구단59594

체류기간연장등불허가처분취소

Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiffs were foreigners of Mongolian nationality, and Plaintiff A entered the Republic of Korea on a short-term visit (C-3) on April 22, 2016, and Plaintiff B entered the Republic of Korea on June 21, 2016. On July 19, 2016, the Plaintiffs filed an application for change of status of sojourn with the Defendant to change the status of stay (F-1) to the status of stay (hereinafter “instant application”).

B. On August 3, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition not to change each status of stay against the Plaintiffs on the ground that “the lack of inevitable stay in Korea, etc.” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 11 evidence, Eul 1 and 2 evidence (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiffs' assertion of this case is unlawful by abusing discretion for the following reasons.

1) The Plaintiffs are parents of C, who were naturalizationed as a national of the Republic of Korea on August 7, 2014, and their grandchildren died on June 19, 2016, and the Plaintiffs filed the instant application to visit and stay (F-1) only to the parents of immigrants by marriage, and the status of stay cannot be deemed to be permitted. The Plaintiffs constitute persons who want to stay in the Republic of Korea for a long time without engaging in occupational activities, such as visiting relatives, living together with their family members, rearing, home organization, or other similar reasons, or persons who are deemed to have the need to stay in the Republic of Korea for a long time, and the status of stay (F-1) is too harsh to the Plaintiffs when considering the disadvantages they need to cope with due to the instant disposition. According to the instant disposition, the instant disposition is too harsh to the Plaintiffs when considering the disadvantages of the Plaintiffs, according to the guidance of their parents, the instant disposition is permitted to stay for a long-term period of stay (F-1).

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2016.12.27 2016누56068

-서울행정법원 2015.05.15 2015구단755

-서울행정법원 2021.3.25. 선고 2020구단15591 판결

-대법원 2016.07.14 2015두48846

-서울행정법원 2016.04.25 2015구단12673