1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in the judgment against the Republic of Korea shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim

Details of the disposition

In this part of the purport of the plaintiff's assertion, this court's reasoning is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is accepted by Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The plaintiff asserts that there is no legal interest in dispute over the instant deportation order since the defendant Busan Immigration Control Office, the plaintiff left the Republic of Korea on September 13, 2016 to determine the judgment on the claim against the head of Busan Immigration Office.

Judgment

As an administrative disposition loses its effect upon the completion of its enforcement, it shall be deemed that there is no legal interest in seeking confirmation of cancellation or invalidation of the administrative disposition, barring any special circumstance to deem that any legal interest is infringed upon by remaining external form after its execution is completed. However, since the records of such administrative disposition are deemed to be treated at a disadvantage in the future, it is stipulated in law as being treated at a disadvantage in the future, and if the records of such administrative disposition are subject to statutory aggravation requirements, the risk that the other party may be subject to aggravated administrative disposition in the future according to the statutory aggravation requirements due to the existence of such administrative disposition is specific and realistic. Thus, the other party has the interest in filing a lawsuit to remove

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2004Du14106 Decided March 25, 2005, Supreme Court Decision 2003Du1684 Decided June 22, 2006, etc.). In this case, as recognized earlier, the Plaintiff already left the Republic of Korea and the enforcement of the instant deportation order against the Plaintiff was terminated. However, the Plaintiff may be prohibited from entering the Republic of Korea until five years after departure pursuant to Article 11(1)6 of the Immigration Control Act. Thus, the Plaintiff’s legal interest remains due to the remainder of the instant deportation order.