1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, from March 2006 to July 2014, imposed and collected comprehensive real estate tax, value-added tax, corporate tax, capital gains tax, etc. from around July 2014, as indicated in the attached Table, is liable to pay national taxes (including additional dues) in total of 56 cases as of 2018.

B. The Commissioner of the National Tax Service requested the Plaintiff to prohibit departure on the ground that the Plaintiff was delinquent in national tax, and the Defendant issued a disposition to continue to extend the period of prohibition of departure pursuant to Article 4-2 of the Immigration Control Act after the Plaintiff’s disposition of prohibition of departure based on Article 4(1)4 of the Immigration Control Act was issued on May 20, 2016, and issued a disposition to extend the period of prohibition of departure on May 18, 2018 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) from May 19, 2018 to November 18, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 14 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is already declared bankrupt by filing a petition for bankruptcy in around 2014, and the income gained as the representative of the legal entity is not significant, and thus there is no concern that there is no property to carry out the current compulsory execution and there is concern that property will escape abroad. Thus, the instant disposition should be revoked as it violates the excessive prohibition principle, thereby infringing the Plaintiff’s freedom of residence transfer, and is unlawful by abusing discretion.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. 1) The Plaintiff acquired the qualification as an attorney-at-law and operated a law firm or law office from around 1988 to around 2000, and served as a representative attorney-at-law in B (business closure around February 201) from around 2000 to 2011.

B. The Plaintiff obtained a total of KRW 3,064,474,280 from around 200 to purchase a large number of real estate and then sell it again.