1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea upon obtaining the nationality of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as "China"), the sojourn status for visiting employment (H-2) on July 4, 2007, and thereafter repeated entry into and departure from the Republic of Korea on several occasions, and extended the sojourn period on April 16, 2013, the Plaintiff obtained permission from April 16, 2013 to April 16, 2014.

B. According to the “Guidance Manual by Status of Sojourn” prepared by the Ministry of Justice, in order for overseas Koreans staying in the Republic of Korea to be employed in the construction industry, the “certificate of recognition of employment in the construction industry” should be issued.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff received a certificate of recognition of the employment of construction business from May 19, 201 to May 18, 2012.

C. On February 10, 2014, the Defendant revoked the Plaintiff’s sojourn status for visiting employment pursuant to Articles 89(1)3 and 17(1) of the Immigration Control Act (amended by Act No. 12421, Mar. 18, 2014; hereinafter the same) on the ground that “the Plaintiff was exposed to employment on the construction site on November 23, 2012 and December 6, 2013, despite the expiration of the term of validity of the Plaintiff’s employment recognition certificate of construction business,” and issued an order for departure (hereinafter “disposition for revocation of the instant sojourn status”) pursuant to Article 68(1) of the Immigration Control Act, pursuant to Article 68(1) of the Immigration Control Act.

(hereinafter referred to as “the order for departure of this case”). [The grounds for recognition] Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, Eul’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination ex officio as to the legitimacy of the part seeking revocation of the status of stay in this case among the lawsuit in this case

A. On September 30, 2014, after the closure of pleadings in the first instance trial, the Defendant added a claim seeking revocation of the revocation of the status of stay in the instant case only as a preparatory document dated August 11, 2014, after the Plaintiff sought revocation of the order for departure in the reference document for reference from September 30, 2014, which was after the closure of pleadings in the first instance trial.