1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, as a national of the People's Republic of China, married with B who is a national of the Republic of Korea on November 12, 2008, and entered the Republic of Korea on March 11, 2009 as the spouse (F-2-1) status of the citizen, and stayed in the Republic of Korea.

B. On November 7, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a divorce lawsuit against B with the Suwon District Court of Suwon District as the Suwon District Court of 2012ddan3346, and the Plaintiff and B divorced on November 7, 2012, “The Plaintiff and B shall be divorced due to the causes attributable to B. The Plaintiff shall pay consolation money of KRW 1 million to the Plaintiff up to December 31, 2012,” and accordingly, the Plaintiff and B divorced.

C. Around February 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for change of status of stay (hereinafter “instant application”) to change the status of stay as a permanent resident (F-5).

On August 29, 2014, the Defendant rendered a decision not to permit the instant application on the ground of the lack of authenticity of marriage.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] A] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. A lawsuit seeking revocation of a judgment as to the legitimacy of a lawsuit of this case is intended to restore a state of illegality arising from an illegal disposition to its original state so as to relieve the rights and interests infringed or obstructed by such disposition. As such, the validity of a disposition, etc. should continue. If an administrative disposition is revoked or withdrawn by the competent administrative agency, such disposition shall no longer exist because it loses its validity, and a lawsuit seeking revocation against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Du35331, May 29, 2014). According to the purport of the foregoing case’s health team, the entry of evidence Nos. 6 and 7, and the entire pleadings, the Defendant revoked the instant disposition against the Plaintiff on August 5, 2015 on the ground that the Plaintiff lacks the authenticity of marriage, and Article 6 of the Nationality Act.