1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. B (B, C, and hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff’s wife”) entered the Republic of Korea on April 10, 2015 with his/her nationality as a short-term visit (C-3) sojourn status on April 10, 2015, and obtained permission to change his/her status of stay for general training (D-4) on May 27, 2015.

B. On September 26, 2015, the Plaintiff, a Mongolian nationality, entered the Republic of Korea with a short-term visit (C-3) sojourn status on a short-term basis, and registered the marriage with the Plaintiff’s wife at the Mongolian Embassy on December 9, 2015.

C. On December 14, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for permission to change the status of stay with the accompanying status of stay (F-3) on the ground that “the spouse of a person holding the status of stay for general training (D-4)” with the Defendant.

On March 15, 2016, the defendant rejected the application for permission to change the status of stay for the plaintiff due to other reasons, such as lack of requirements.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 1, 2, 3, 5, and Eul's 1 to 4

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. Since the Defendant’s wife of the Defendant’s main port of safety depart from Mongolia on February 14, 2017, and the Plaintiff is no longer able to stay in the Republic of Korea regardless of whether the instant disposition was revoked, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it has no interest in the lawsuit.

B. Since a lawsuit seeking the cancellation of an illegal administrative disposition is a lawsuit seeking the restoration to its original state by excluding an illegal state caused by an illegal disposition, and protecting or remedying the rights and interests infringed or obstructed by such disposition, it is theoretical sense to dispute the illegality of a certain administrative disposition, but there is no benefit of lawsuit seeking the cancellation if there is no practical utility or benefit to be resolved by a trial.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2014Du12284 Decided May 12, 2016, and Supreme Court Decision 2013Du1638 Decided June 10, 2016, etc.).

Judgment

Enforcement Rule of the Immigration Control Act [Attachment 1] 28 of the upper limit of the period of stay by status of stay (Article 18-2) granted on one occasion shall be a accompanying (F-3) qualification.