logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.10.18 2015구합70011
체류기간연장등불허가처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 7, 2007, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea as a foreigner of the nationality of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as "China"), and changed the status of stay to the qualification of visit employment (H-2) on December 11, 2007, and applied for the status of stay for general training (D-4) on March 30, 201, while applying for the status of stay for general training (D-4) to the Defendant on March 30, 201, on the ground that the Defendant was denied on November 21, 2011, by clarifying his voluntary departure intent to the Incheon Airport Immigration Office and leaving the Republic of Korea on December 24, 2011.

B. Meanwhile, on August 3, 2011, the Plaintiff reported marriage with B who is a national of the Republic of Korea, and entered the Republic of Korea as the spouse (F-6) of the citizen on October 13, 2012.

C. On January 17, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for divorce against B on August 21, 2013, with the Suwon District Court 2013Ddan1328. On July 16, 2014, the said court rendered a judgment that “the Plaintiff and B shall be divorced” and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

On November 24, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for extension of the period of stay by asserting that the Plaintiff constitutes the status of stay of a person under the marital relationship (F-6-C). However, on May 12, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision not to grant the extension of the period of stay, etc. (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff did not fall under the status of stay of a person under the marital relationship.

E. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request on August 4, 2015.

F. On the other hand, on April 20, 2015, the Plaintiff prepared a written departure confirmation to the effect that “the Plaintiff was divorced with B, and did not submit documents evidencing the objective causes related to the divorce judgment,” and submitted it to the Defendant by the end of October 2015.”

[Reasons for Recognition] There is no dispute;

arrow