1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: "The procedure for granting the status of stay and the issuance of visa shall not be deemed to be legally identical to that for granting the status of stay and the issuance of visa because the procedure for granting the status of stay and the issuance of visa are being carried out in one document or one procedure in practice, or the refusal of the issuance of visa would not be permitted if it is made in one document or one procedure," and "The plaintiff shall not be deemed to legally identical to the requirements for granting the status of stay and the issuance of visa" in 12th 9." [The plaintiff is in a special relationship with the Immigration Control Act concerning the issuance of visa to overseas Koreans, and the application of the Immigration Control Act as it increases the requirements for the issuance of visa to facilitate entry and departure of overseas Koreans. In light of the language and purport of the Overseas Koreans Act and the Immigration Control Act, the Overseas Koreans Act, like the plaintiff and the Korean nationals who are not nationals of the Republic of Korea, provided that the requirements for granting the status of stay under Article 2 of the Immigration Control Act to overseas Koreans, which meet the requirements of foreign Nationality Act."

The purpose of facilitating the issuance of visas required for entry into the Republic of Korea is only to protect foreigners who are not foreign nationality Koreans in the Republic of Korea relatively more.