1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiffs were foreigners of Mongolian nationality, and entered the Republic of Korea on a short-term visit (C-3) on January 4, 2016.

B. On March 25, 2016, Plaintiff A filed an application for change of status of stay with the Defendant as a general training (D-4). However, on July 1, 2016, the Defendant rejected the change of status of stay with respect to the said Plaintiff on the grounds of “those subject to the restriction on qualification change, uncertainty of financial standing, uncertainty of academic purpose, etc.”

(hereinafter “instant No. 1 Disposition”). (c)

Plaintiff

B On March 25, 2016, the Plaintiff’s spouse applied for the change of the status of stay as a partner (F-3). However, on July 1, 2016, the Defendant rejected the change of the status of stay of Plaintiff B on the ground that the change of the status of stay of Plaintiff A was denied.

(hereinafter “Disposition No. 2 of this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] / 【No. 1, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1 and 2 (including virtual numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiffs' assertion No. 1 of this case is unlawful since it abused discretionary power in the following respects. The second disposition of this case based on the premise of the first disposition of this case is also unlawful.

1) At the time when Plaintiff A obtained a visa for short-term visit (C-3), the status of stay was changed as a general training course. The Plaintiff was not notified of the restriction on the change of status of stay for short-term visit (C-3) until the time of applying for change of status of stay. 2) The money deposited in the account submitted to the Defendant for the purpose of proving financial capacity is educational expenses and living expenses to be incurred by Plaintiff A while staying in the Republic of Korea. The Defendant rejected the change of status of stay without further examination of financial status or academic purpose of the Plaintiff solely on the ground that the said money was withdrawn after the submission of financial capacity certificate.

B. Determination 1) Articles 10, 17, and 24 of the Immigration Control Act, Articles 12 and 30 [Attachment 1] of the Enforcement Decree of the Immigration Control Act.