1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the judgment of the court of first instance, is the same as the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the following judgment is added to

Therefore, it is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary judgment] The plaintiff asserts that "the plaintiff maintains a true matrimonial relationship with B even in the trial, so the prior disposition of this case is unlawful on different premise.

According to Articles 10(1), 17(1) and 24(1) of the Immigration Act, any foreigner who intends to enter the Republic of Korea shall have the status of sojourn prescribed by Presidential Decree, and any foreigner who intends to enter the Republic of Korea may stay in the Republic of Korea within the scope of his/her status

In addition, if a foreigner staying in the Republic of Korea intends to engage in activities that are different from his/her status of stay, he/she must obtain prior permission from the Minister

As such, permission to grant or change the status of stay is related to the sovereignty of the country, which comprehensively establishes the legal status of foreigners, such as the grounds for sojourn in the Republic of Korea and the scope of their activities.

On the other hand, there is no provision that grants foreigners the right to acquire and change the status of stay in the relevant statutes, such as the Immigration Control Act.

In addition, when considering the fact that a foreigner who applied for a change of status of sojourn satisfies the requirements under Article 12 [Attachment Table 1] of the Enforcement Decree of the Immigration Control Act, the Minister of Justice or the administrative agency delegated by him/her with the authority to permit the change of status of sojourn is clearly confirmed to have failed to meet the requirements under Article 12 [Attachment Table 1] of the Enforcement Decree of the Immigration Control Act, and there is an objective and reasonable doubt as to whether the foreigner applied for a change