1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 21, 2013, the Plaintiff, a U.S. national, entered and staying in the Republic of Korea as a religious (D-2) qualification, left the Republic of Korea on March 17, 2014, and stayed in the Republic of Korea as an overseas Korean (F-4) qualification on August 25, 2015.

B. On July 20, 2018, the Plaintiff was sentenced to three years of imprisonment and four years of suspended execution due to the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (fence) in Incheon District Court 2018Gohap177, and the said sentence became final and conclusive around that time.

The crime of the crime of the above crime is that "the plaintiff imported 27 hours in X-si using international ordinary mail over two occasions after July 2017 and August 2017 (i.e., 22 hours) and possessed 7 hours in X-si around February 2018."

C. On July 23, 2018, the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to depart from the Republic of Korea by September 20, 2018 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) by applying Articles 68(1)1, 46(1)3 and 13, and 11(1)3 and 4 of the Immigration Control Act, taking into account the Plaintiff’s intent of voluntary departure, etc.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was made by the Plaintiff as an adopted child of Korea, who had been dependent on the X-gu at the time of high school students, and was almost out of the X-gu at the time of high school students by making considerable efforts, and was found in Korea to find the identity of the Plaintiff, and obtained good grades with good academic attitude by entering the International University Department of University, and was not imported, possessed for the purpose of distributing the X-gu, that is not very small amount of transfer, and that there is no risk of repeating a crime in light of the following: (a) the instant disposition was unlawful by abusing and abusing discretionary power in violation of the proportionality.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

(c).