(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.8.26.선고 2015구단3748 판결

On July 28, 2015, the defendant's disposition of refusing extension of the period of application for change of place of business against the plaintiff shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, who entered the Republic of Korea on January 8, 2013, entered the business place of the Plaintiff and was working in the Malim Epic, Co., Ltd., Ltd., which was located at the time of Gyeonggi Culture, and filed an application for change of the place of business with the Defendant after his/her withdrawal on October 30, 2014, and obtained permission for change of the place of business from the Defendant from October 30 to January 30, 2015. On January 30, 2015, the Plaintiff applied for extension of the period of application for change of the place of business on the ground of disease again, and extended the period by February 6, 2015.

B. The term of validity of a job seeking was expired when the Plaintiff was arranged for a total of 34 workplaces during the period of permission and extension. The Plaintiff again filed an application for extension of the period of extension of the workplace with the Defendant on July 10, 2015 without obtaining permission for change of the workplace, and the Defendant rejected the instant disposition on the ground that the Plaintiff’s application for extension does not constitute an inevitable cause as prescribed by the relevant statutes.

D. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal on September 21, 2015, but was dismissed on March 15, 2016. [Grounds for recognition] Nos. 1, 6, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The disposition of this case is unlawful since it infringes on the freedom of choice of occupation under Article 15 of the Constitution that the plaintiff did not violate the current law while staying in Korea and that the defendant should enter into an employment contract with the plaintiff and continue to work.

B. Determination

Article 25 (3) of the Act on the Employment, etc. of Foreign Workers shall depart from the Republic of Korea, if a foreign worker fails to obtain the permission to change his/her workplace under Article 21 of the Immigration Control Act, or fails to file an application for the change to another business or workplace within one month from the date the employment contract is terminated with an employer, within three months from the date the application is filed for the change to another business or workplace under paragraph (1): Provided, That if it is impossible to obtain the permission to change his/her workplace due to occupational accidents, diseases, pregnancy, childbirth, etc., or it is impossible to file an application for the change of workplace, the period shall be calculated from the date when such cause ceases to exist. As seen earlier, it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff was unable to obtain the permission to change the workplace within the effective period of registration of job seeking, and that the Plaintiff is unable

Meanwhile, as long as the Plaintiff did not obtain permission to change the place of business within the validity period of the registration of job seeking, the restriction of the period of permission to change a foreign worker’s place of business is intended to protect domestic workers’ employment opportunities and prevent foreign workers who entered the place of business for the purpose of labor from being staying in Korea for a long time without having to work for the purpose of labor, and thereby promoting efficient employment management, the grounds alleged by the Plaintiff alone cannot be deemed as infringing the Plaintiff’s freedom of occupation under Article 25 of the Constitution due to the instant disposition

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit.