(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.12.26 2014구합2820

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.12.26 2014구합2820

체류기간연장등불허가처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Details of the disposition

A. On May 6, 2008, the Plaintiff filed a marriage report with a foreign woman of Vietnam who is a national of the Republic of Korea on May 6, 2008, and entered the Republic of Korea as the spouse (F-2) status of the citizen on December 8, 2008 and stayed in Korea.

B. B filed a divorce lawsuit against the Plaintiff on August 2, 2011, and the Plaintiff also filed a divorce lawsuit against B on September 20, 2011.

From February 27, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff were divorced between B and B from the lawsuit [In Busan Family Court 2011ddan20399, 201ddan25257 (Joint Counterclaim)] to the effect that “B and the Plaintiff shall waive their respective claim for property, such as consolation money and property division claim related to the divorce of this case against each other. B and the Plaintiff shall waive their respective claim against each other.”

C. On March 13, 2014, the Plaintiff applied for the extension of the period of stay to the Defendant.

However, on August 6, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition to refuse to extend the period of stay to the Plaintiff and to leave the Republic of Korea until August 27, 2014 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including the number with each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), assertion of the purport and judgment of the whole pleadings

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) that the Plaintiff divorced with B is attributable to the causes attributable to B such as habitually drinking and assault, etc. This is evident according to the evidence, such as the fact that the provisions of the divorce conciliation lawsuit of this case provide that the divorce is attributable to B, and the written diagnosis submitted by the Plaintiff to the Defendant. Nevertheless, the instant disposition on the ground that there is no evidence of proving the spouse’s liability against the marriage is erroneous as it is based on mistake of facts, and thus, constitutes an abuse of discretion. 2) The public interest to achieve the instant disposition is extremely weak, while the Plaintiff has been for the past six years

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2015.04.09 2014구합2851

-서울행정법원 2014.11.21 2014구합12758

-서울행정법원 2014.11.14 2014구합10363

-서울행정법원 2015.11.20 2015구단55557

-서울행정법원 2015.02.04 2014구단57150