1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff (B) entered the Republic of Korea as non-professional employment (E-9) on January 17, 2008, and was granted permission for stay until January 14, 201. On October 31, 2010, the Plaintiff (E-9) married with a national C (D) of the Republic of Korea on May 6, 2011, and was granted permission for a change of the status of stay as a citizen’s spouse on May 6, 201, and was granted a license for an extension of the period of stay on July 18, 2016 while staying there was an application for a change of the status of stay as a permanent resident (F-5) on July 18, 2016, but was denied on August 25, 2017 due to lack of financial capacity and lack of marriage and of lack of marital authenticity.

(The plaintiff was permitted to extend the period of stay until May 4, 2018 before filing an application for the change of the above status of stay, and thus continued to stay even after the above non-permission disposition.

In other words, on April 3, 2018, the Plaintiff applied for extension of the period of stay for marriage immigration (F-6). On May 10, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition not to grant the Plaintiff the application for extension of the period of stay (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is unlawful as it is based on misunderstanding of facts, since the Plaintiff is running a normal marriage life after marriage in 2010.

B. If a person intends to stay in the Republic of Korea on the grounds of marriage with a person of the judgment, it does not merely make a marriage report, but also perform the duty to cooperate in the refusal of marriage under Article 826(1) of the Civil Act, which is revealed as a result of living together with others through the formation of an economic community and mental or physical combination for the mutual support among social norms, and the overall purport of the statements and arguments in subparagraphs 5 through 9, and in light of the following circumstances, it is difficult to recognize the substance of marriage under the social norms between the plaintiff and C.

The Plaintiff.