2018Nu6652 Revocation of revocation of permission for extension of sojourn period, etc.

A

Since the plaintiff is a minor, the legal representative

Ministry of Parental Authority B;

MoC

Attorney Seo Chang-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant-appellee, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellant

The head of Incheon Immigration and Foreign Branch Office

Suwon District Court Decision 2017Gudan9030 Decided October 10, 2018

February 21, 2019

March 7, 2019

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The defendant's non-permission disposition is revoked on September 13, 2017, such as extension of the period of stay against the plaintiff.

1. cite the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance;

This court's reasoning is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except as follows. Thus, this court's reasoning is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

○ 4 11. The following shall be added in front of Article 10(1) and (2) of the Immigration Control Act.

The relevant laws, regulations, etc. of the disposition of this case shall be as shown in the attached Form.

○ Not less than 4 lines below 5 lines shall be added to:

"Foreign stay guide New Fran, which is prescribed by the Ministry of Justice on the status of stay of foreigners under the Immigration Control Act and the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, will be a discretionary rule, i.e., administrative agency's internal rules established on the basis of the exercise of discretionary power, in light of the form and content of the foreigner's stay guide. The discretionary rules determined by the administrative agency should be respected as far as possible, unless it is objectively deemed reasonable and unreasonable. However, the standards set by the foreigner stay guide is deemed reasonable and reasonable in line with the basic principles of the foreigner's stay management prescribed by the Immigration Control Act and the Enforcement Decree

○ 6 10,11 lines for the following reasons: “The parts are insignificant, not ..........................”

The Plaintiff asserts that “The Ministry of Justice has suspended the compulsory departure of a child staying in Korea until the completion of a high school at the time of wishing to do so, but during that period, the Plaintiff has to live with fear of continuous crackdown, cannot receive educational expenses, cannot receive proper treatment due to the impossibility of joining the health insurance, and the unstable status is unable to design the future, and the substantial right of education is not guaranteed. However, solely on the sole basis of the circumstance asserted by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff is not obliged to stay as a foreign student (D-4-3).”

○ In the end of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, the attached Form of this judgment shall be attached to the relevant laws and regulations.

2. Conclusion

Since the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

The presiding judge, judge and charter

Judges Dok-type

Judge Lee Young-young

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.