1. The judgment of the first instance court is modified in accordance with the purport of the claim amended by the trial court as follows.

In the lawsuit of this case.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the instant case is as follows: (a) the court added or added some of the facts as stated in the 2.1 and deleted the part as stipulated in paragraph (5). As such, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) thereby,

2. In addition or after addition, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance that is used in addition or after addition is deleted from the 10-round 2 pages of the judgment of the court of first instance, the following shall be added, and the 11-round 2-round 2-round 11 pages shall be added to the column for recognition of the 2-round 2-round 10

On July 25, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition to extend the period of prohibition of departure extended from August 6, 2016 to February 5, 2017 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The following shall be added to three (3) pages of the first instance judgment:

4. Of the instant lawsuit, where the effective period is specified in an administrative disposition regarding the legal nature of the part seeking revocation of the disposition ordering prohibition of departure from August 6, 2016 to September 7, 2016, the validity of such administrative disposition is invalidated due to the lapse of the pertinent period, unless there exist any special circumstances to deem that any legal interest is infringed upon due to the remaining external form of the disposition after the expiration of the pertinent period, there is no legal interest to seek revocation of the disposition, unless there exist any special circumstances to deem that the disposition is in violation of

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Du1946, Jul. 8, 2004). Of the instant disposition, the part ordering prohibition of departure from August 6, 2016 to September 7, 2016 among the instant disposition is not only for which the period has elapsed as of the date of the closing of argument in the trial, but also for the aforementioned part to be subject to the premise or aggravation of the unfavorable disposition against the Plaintiff, and thus, it cannot be said that there is a benefit to seek revocation of the instant disposition to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the part of the instant lawsuit seeking the revocation of the extension of the period of prohibition of departure from August 6, 2016 to September 7, 2016.