Court Cancels Removal, Detention Orders Over Asylum Seeker's Unpermitted Work

Who this helps

This may help readers curious how a court viewed removal or detention orders issued for working without permission while an asylum claim was under review.

Case overview

Case number

2013구합136617

Court

Seoul Administrative Court

Date of judgment

Oct 10, 2013 (Thu)

Topic

Departure Orders, Deportation & Enforcement

Original title (Korean)

난민신청인이 심사기간 중 체류자격외 활동허가를 받지 아니하고 취업활동을 하였다는 이유로 한 강제퇴거명령 및…

A person who applied for refugee status worked with permission for about 4 months and then received a decision denying refugee recognition. The person objected to the Minister of Justice, and the work permit period ended during the review. A new permit application was denied. The person was caught working without permission and received a deportation order and a detention order.

Is a removal order lawful when an asylum seeker works without permission during review?

The asylum seeker worked with permission for about 4 months. After a refusal of refugee status, the person filed an objection. The permission period ended during that review, and a new request was denied. The person was caught working without permission and received removal and detention orders. The court found both orders exceeded and abused discretionary power, and cancelled them.

How the court ruled

The court found that the deportation order and the detention order exceeded and abused discretionary authority, and cancelled them. It noted that the Refugee Handbook provides that asylum applicants are to be able to stay in the country during the review period, and that the Refugee Act, in force from July 1, 2013, recognizes living-cost support or work permits. It found that, when a decision takes well over 1 year, blocking all work conflicts with the constitutional spirit of a civilized nation. It concluded that the applicant could not be deemed to have abused the asylum application.

What to check in a similar situation

Immigration offices can confirm the result of a request for permission for activities outside one's status and the permitted period. Courts hold the reasoning in the ruling cancelling the orders.

• Find your immigration office
• Extending your period of stay
• Contacts: Immigration Contact Center 1345

Terms explained

Removal order

An order from an administrative body to make a foreign national leave the country by force.

Detention order

An order that keeps a foreign national in a facility during removal procedures.

Permission for activities outside status

A separate approval to do something, such as work, that the current residence status does not allow.

Abuse of discretion

Using an authority's room for judgment in a way that goes beyond its proper limits.

More rulings on this topic

• Suit to confirm no duty to pay Immigration Act fine under notification disposition inadmissible · Seoul Administrative Court
• Case on whether a decision rejecting an objection to a detention order can be challenged in court · Seoul High Court
• Ruling on a Departure Order Issued to a Person Who Entered on Working Holiday (H-1) Status · Seoul Administrative Court

See all 18 rulings on Departure Orders, Deportation & Enforcement →

Frequently asked questions

Who brought the lawsuit?

A person who had applied for refugee status sued to cancel the removal order and the detention order.

How did the court rule?

It found both orders exceeded and abused discretionary power and cancelled them. It said the person could not be assumed to have abused the asylum system.

Does this result apply as is to similar cases?

It is the court's decision in that case and does not apply as is to other cases.