1. The part concerning a request for cancellation of a departure order among the judgment of the first instance, shall be revoked, and the part concerning the claim for cancellation shall be brought;

Details of the disposition

The court's explanation on this part is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the court "(s) 12 of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter "the instant disposition") is "(s) - (hereinafter "the instant disposition") - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

If the plaintiff seeks revocation of the disposition of departure order before the draft of this case, such disposition is unlawful because it does not exist, and if the defendant seeks revocation of the notification of departure time limit, the above notification is not an independent disposition, and thus, it is unlawful.

The existence of an administrative disposition, which is the object of a litigation, is a lawful requirement of an administrative litigation, and so long as there is no disposition seeking revocation, such disposition shall be dismissed as illegal.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Nu6707, Aug. 26, 1997). According to the foregoing, the Defendant, while rendering the instant disposition, notified the Defendant of the departure time limit on May 14, 2014, specifying the departure time limit in the notice of disapproval of the extension of sojourn period.

If the above notification does not permit the extension of sojourn period, it shall be issued to the applicant a non-permission notice on the extension of sojourn period, and such notification shall clearly state the departure period within the limit not exceeding 14 days from the date of issuance, pursuant to Article 33 of the Enforcement Decree of the Immigration Control Act. Thus, the above notification alone cannot be deemed that the defendant ordered departure from the disposition in this case against the plaintiff.

Therefore, the part seeking the cancellation of the order of departure among the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as it seeks the cancellation of non-existent administrative disposition.

The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the instant disposition is a fine twice due to driving without a license or driving under drinking.