1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 14, 2004, the Plaintiff, a Chinese national woman, completed a marriage report with a national B of the Republic of Korea on April 14, 2004, and acquired the qualification for residence (F-2) after entering the Republic of Korea on July 20, 200

B. Around September 17, 2008, the Plaintiff filed a divorce suit against B with the Incheon District Court 2008Ddan22566, and the court rendered a judgment of divorce to the effect that the marriage relationship has ceased due to the cause attributable to B on January 7, 2009.

C. After the filing of the above divorce lawsuit, the Plaintiff obtained permission to change the status of stay to other (G-1). On June 23, 2009, the Plaintiff left China and re-entered to the short-term comprehensive (C-3) visa on September 14, 2009.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff applied for naturalization on March 20, 2009 and changed the status of stay to the qualification of visiting Dong (F-1) on the grounds of this on September 29, 2009, but on December 22, 2011, the application for naturalization was rejected on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s ability to maintain livelihood was insufficient and that his behavior was not good.

E. On July 26, 2012, the Plaintiff obtained permission to change his/her status of stay (F-6-3 on September 14, 2014 on the expiry date), and on September 15, 2014, filed an application for change of his/her status of stay with the Defendant as a visiting agent (F-1) for family settlement. However, on January 30, 2015, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s application on the ground that “the long-term period has elapsed after the completion of divorce, and there is no reason to change his/her qualification for family settlement.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 6, 9, 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion was made by the plaintiff for a marriage with B in 2004, but the marriage was broken down due to the reasons attributable to B, who is the spouse, and trusted the extension of the period of stay and has been staying in Korea for not less than 10 years until now, and formed an economic and social foundation in Korea. This case's disposition identical to a forced departure is very likely to be suffered by the plaintiff compared to the public interest to achieve the disposition.