logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.07.16 2019누37549
출국금지연장처분취소
Text

1. On May 29, 2019, upon a claim for a change in exchange in this court, the Defendant made against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 22, 2018, the Plaintiff (1946) held office as the representative director of the Company B and is delinquent in total of KRW 1,192,714,420 as of September 22, 2018 (25,532,890 as of this year) (255,532,890 as of September 22, 2018).

6,00 won of individual per capita of resident tax, A 6,00 won of August 31, 2014 (170 won 6,170 won of local income tax of KRW 6,170 on August 31, 2013, Seo-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan Income Tax of KRW 18,795,220 won of KRW 40,508, 790 on August 31, 2008, A 6,00 won of individual per capita of resident tax of KRW 170 won of KRW 6,170, 170 won of local income tax of KRW 30,50 on August 31, 2017, KRW 205, KRW 305, KRW 305, KRW 205, KRW 305, KRW 305, KRW 97, KRW 205, KRW 2327, KRW 896,00, KRW 150, KRW 2224, KRW 3108, KRW 6,707.108.

B. Upon the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor’s request for prohibition of departure on May 28, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition of prohibition of departure (from May 28, 2018 to November 27, 2018) against the Plaintiff under Article 4(1) of the Immigration Control Act, and issued a disposition of extending the period of prohibition of departure on November 28, 2018 from November 28, 2018 to May 27, 2019, and issued a disposition of extending the period of prohibition of departure on May 29, 2019 from May 28, 2019 to September 20, 2019.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). [The grounds for recognition] Facts that there is no dispute, Gap’s 1, 3, and 8 evidence, Eul’s 1, 3, and 12 evidence, Eul’s 13-1 and 2-2 evidence 13-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful or not, and the part on “the Plaintiff’s assertion” and “the fact of recognition” are identical to the pertinent part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

C. Determination 1 Article 4(1) of the Immigration Control Act.

arrow