| Nationality |
Russia |
| Case Overview |
The client was fined 5 million KRW for obscene acts using a communication medium and fined 300,000 KRW the same year for violating the Road Traffic Act, and subsequently received a deportation order. |
| Special Circumstances |
The client was married to a Korean national and had established a family, with their spouse expecting a child. An administrative appeal was filed but was dismissed. |
| Case Handler |
Attorney Ju-Hyeong Kim |
| Outcome |
Victory in a Lawsuit to Overturn a Deportation Order |
1. Client Situation and Facts
The client is a foreign national of Russian nationality who, after entering Korea in 2016, has lived in the country for about nine years, sustaining a livelihood through modeling and broadcasting activities. The client has been steadily working toward stable settlement and naturalization. However, around 2023, due to inappropriate conduct with a woman met through past online chats, the client was fined 5 million KRW for violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes (obscene acts using communication media). In the same year, the client was additionally fined 300,000 KRW for violating the Road Traffic Act, which put them at risk of receiving a deportation order.
At that time, the client was married to a Korean national and had established a family, with their spouse expecting a child. Despite these humanitarian and social circumstances, the Immigration Office issued a deportation order based solely on the client’s criminal record, without sufficiently considering these factors.
As a result, the client faced the sudden threat of losing their livelihood and family. After their administrative appeal was dismissed, they sought help from Law Firm Majung as a last hope.
2. Case Issues and Resolution Process
1) Argued that the offense was minor and the client made efforts to prevent reoffending.
The client’s violations were all first offenses with no prior convictions of the same nature. Since the incident, the client has deeply reflected and voluntarily completed a sexual violence treatment program as a genuine effort to prevent reoffending. The fines were also fully paid. Despite this, the deportation order was issued without any consideration of these circumstances, which we argued was excessive and called for a reconsideration of discretionary authority.
2) Expressed the excessive hardship the client and their family would face.
The client was living with their spouse, who was about to give birth. If deported, the client would be forcibly separated from their spouse and the unborn child, resulting in a heartbreaking family separation. We emphasized that this is more than a simple administrative action and could lead to serious humanitarian harm.
3) Argued that the deportation order was an excessively harsh measure.
The client had lived in Korea for an extended period, having substantially settled into society. They contributed to the local community through tax payments and volunteer work, and their family life was based domestically. Despite this, the decision to fully restrict their stay without adequately considering humanitarian factors such as the spouse’s impending childbirth was excessive. We stressed that this decision requires careful reconsideration.
3. Case Outcome
Through Majung’s systematic and professional response, the court determined that the Immigration Office’s deportation order constituted an abuse and deviation of discretion, and ultimately ruled to cancel the order. As a result, the client was able to avoid forced deportation, maintain their status of residence in Korea, and continue living stably with their spouse and soon-to-be-born child.
4. Significance of the Judgment
This ruling is an important precedent confirming that a deportation order based solely on a foreign national’s simple criminal record, without considering humanitarian and social circumstances, can be deemed an excessive administrative measure. Administrative actions such as deportation orders must carefully balance the public interest of the state against the disadvantages imposed on the individual. For foreign nationals who have established a substantial foundation for settlement, the harm caused can be irreversible.
Therefore, when faced with such cases, it is crucial not to rely solely on claims of unfairness but to present logical arguments based on specific facts along with sufficient evidence. Seeking the assistance of a legal representative specializing in immigration law to respond systematically is of utmost importance.
