| Visa |
Visiting Employment (H-2) Visa |
| Case Overview |
The client fell while riding an electric bicycle, leading to a drunk driving charge and a 5 million KRW fine. The Immigration Office subsequently issued a deportation order. |
| Special Circumstances |
The client filed an administrative appeal independently but was rejected. The employer then entrusted the case to Ma-Jung. |
| Outcome |
Cancellation of the deportation order. |
1. Client Situation and Facts
Mr. A, a Chinese national, was riding a motorized bicycle home after drinking with a friend. He slipped on a slippery substance, lost balance, and fell. A concerned shop owner called the police due to the cold night.
Upon arrival, the police detected the smell of alcohol on Mr. A and measured his blood alcohol concentration at 0.071%. Further investigation revealed that Mr. A did not have a license to operate the motorized bicycle and had not purchased the mandatory insurance.
Although no collisions or property damage occurred, the prosecutor issued a summary order of a 5 million KRW fine for violations of the Road Traffic Act and the Motor Vehicle Compensation Act. Mr. A paid the fine immediately, acknowledging his mistake and showing remorse. However, he soon received a deportation order from the Immigration Office.
Hoping for a quicker resolution, Mr. A filed an administrative appeal independently, which was rejected. His employer then sought help from Ma-Jung to address the issue.
2. Case Issues and Resolution Process
1) Mitigating Circumstances Argument
The Ministry of Justice's Immigration Division stipulates that a foreign national fined 5 million KRW or more for violating the Road Traffic Act can be subject to deportation. This applies to Mr. A. Additionally, such violations are considered to threaten public safety and order.
Ma-Jung emphasized Mr. A’s 20-year residence in Korea without any prior criminal record. We argued that no victims or property damage resulted from the incident, highlighting mitigating circumstances.
2) Unlawfulness of the Immigration Office’s Decision
We argued that Mr. A was not a candidate for entry prohibition or forced deportation under the Immigration Control Act. We demonstrated that he did not pose a threat to public safety or order. We also showed that the Immigration Office had significantly abused its discretionary power in issuing the deportation order.
3. Case Outcome and Client Benefit
Ma-Jung’s diligent efforts led the administrative court to side with Mr. A. The court recognized that the Immigration Office had abused its discretion and acknowledged the mitigating circumstances presented by Ma-Jung.
The deportation order was canceled, allowing Mr. A to continue residing in Korea.
4. Significance of the Judgment (Explanation of the Disposition)
Securing the cancellation of a deportation order is challenging, especially after an administrative appeal is denied. Ma-Jung’s persistence and strategic legal arguments played a crucial role in achieving this outcome.
Mr. A’s case highlights the importance of expert legal assistance in navigating complex immigration and administrative laws. Thanks to Ma-Jung’s efforts, Mr. A can continue his life as a diligent worker in Korea. We are grateful for the trust placed in us by Mr. A and his employer.
