1. The Defendant’s disposition of extending the period of prohibition of departure on November 23, 2016 is revoked.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From April 4, 1985 to April 30, 2002, the Plaintiff operated a liquor wholesale company B. The company became insolvent on December 16, 200.

Accordingly, according to the designation of the secondary taxpayer, the Plaintiff was subject to the imposition of value-added tax, corporate tax, labor income tax, and other global income tax, capital gains tax, and securities transaction tax, which were imposed on the Plaintiff, did not pay the national tax of KRW 4,380,842,870 (including this tax, additional tax, and increased additional tax) as of April 2016.

B. On November 28, 2008, the Commissioner of the National Tax Service requested the Defendant to prohibit the Plaintiff from departing from the Republic of Korea on the grounds of the above national tax delinquency. Accordingly, the Defendant issued a disposition of prohibiting the Plaintiff from departing from the Republic of Korea from December 1, 2008 to May 25, 2009, based on Article 4(1)4 of the Immigration Control Act.

On November 23, 2016, the Defendant extended the period of prohibition of departure several times, and issued a disposition to extend the period of prohibition of departure pursuant to Article 4-2 of the Immigration Control Act from November 26, 2016 to March 13, 2017 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 5, 6, Eul evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is likely to make it difficult for the plaintiff to enforce compulsory execution due to the lack of the ability to pay taxes due to the failure to pay a large amount of national tax due to the bankruptcy while managing the company.

Nevertheless, the Defendant’s prohibition of departure of the Plaintiff violates the Plaintiff’s fundamental rights against the principle of excessive prohibition, and thus, the instant disposition should be revoked as unlawful.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. The Gwangju District Court declared bankruptcy against the plaintiff on March 28, 2007 (Supreme Court Decision 2006Hadan3887, February 12, 2008).