logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.11.29 2016구단11882
체류기간연장등불허가처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On February 13, 2016, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea with a short-term visit (C-3) status on a short-term basis, and on April 18, 2016, filed an application for permission to change the status of stay to the Defendant for a general training (D-4) status (hereinafter “instant application”).

B. On May 4, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition to deny the change of the status of stay on the ground of “insufficient documents, etc. for financial input” (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 2, 4, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. At the time of the instant application, the Plaintiff explained that he/she entered the Korean Language Institute at the graduate school of the New University at the time of the instant application, and explained the existence of a stable residence and the expenses for staying in the Republic of Korea during the period of stay in Korea.

However, since April 19, 2016, due to the relationship that requires a large amount of expenses in the early settlement of the Republic of Korea, the Defendant has withdrawn and used the money from the head of the Tong as a result of the settlement of the Republic of Korea, and some of the head of the passbook transactions were kept in cash because of the lack of financial capacity of the Plaintiff, but the Defendant rejected the instant application on the ground that the instant disposition was an abuse of discretionary authority.

B. (1) In light of the form and text of the Immigration Control Act, Article 10(1) and Article 24 of the Immigration Control Act, Article 12 and Article 30 [Attachment 1] subparag. 13 of the Enforcement Decree of the Immigration Control Act, and the maximum of the scope of activities or the period of sojourn that a foreigner can carry out in the Republic of Korea depending on the status of sojourn, etc., the permission to change the status of sojourn is discretion to decide whether to grant permission in consideration of the applicant’s eligibility, purpose of sojourn, influence on public interest, etc.

(2) In this case.

arrow