Criminal liability of a person who re-entered Korea on a passport with a changed name and date of birth after being deported

Who this helps

This may help people wondering what criminal liability was addressed when someone deported from Korea entered again on a passport with different personal details.

Case overview

Court

Seoul Eastern District Court

Posted on original board

Jul 21, 2014 (Mon)

Topic

Criminal Cases

Original title (Korean)

기존에 불법체류를 이유로 강제출국을 당하였던 자가 성명과 생년월일을 바꿔 본국으로부터 새로운 여권을 발급받아 대한민국에 입국하면서 위…

The defendant kept working illegally after the permitted stay ended, was caught, and left Korea in 2005 under a deportation order. Later, in China, the defendant registered a household record (hukou) under a completely different name and date of birth and obtained a new Chinese passport. The defendant passed the immigration desk at Incheon Airport with that passport. The defendant was first indicted for uttering a forged official document, but the court of first instance found the defendant not guilty. On appeal, prosecutors applied to amend the indictment, and obstruction of official duties by deceit was added as an alternative charge.

Can entering Korea on a passport with a changed name and date of birth after deportation lead to criminal liability?

The defendant was deported for illegal stay. Later, the defendant obtained a new passport in China under a completely different name and date of birth and passed immigration inspection at Incheon Airport. The defendant was first prosecuted for uttering a forged official document, and the first-instance court found not guilty. On appeal, obstruction of official duties by deceit was added as an alternative charge, and the court found this charge proven.

How the court ruled

The court found that the defendant could not properly explain how the name change came about and offered no evidence. It relied on the fact that the defendant registered the household record with personal details completely different from those before deportation, and wrote on an application to extend the period of stay as if entering for the first time. The court therefore held that the defendant obstructed the immigration inspection duties of the officer by deceit that prevented the officer from recognizing the defendant as the same person, and sentenced the defendant to 10 months in prison, suspended for 2 years.

What to check in a similar situation

Entry ban periods and immigration inspection procedures can be checked with immigration and foreign nationals' offices. The trial outcome can be checked with the court concerned.

• Find support centers
• Emergency phone numbers
• Contacts: Korea Legal Aid Corporation 132

Terms explained

Obstruction of official duties by deceit

A crime in which someone uses trickery to keep a public official from properly carrying out their work.

Amendment of the indictment

A procedure in which the prosecutor changes or adds to the charges during a trial.

Suspended sentence

A system in which a sentence is handed down but its execution is put off for a set period.

Forced removal

An administrative measure that sends a foreign national out of the country when they have not kept their legal status of stay.

More rulings on this topic

• Ruling sentencing a defendant to 1 year in prison for illegal entry, illegal stay and aiding another person's illegal entry · Busan District Court
• Students' submission of bank balance certificate found to be an application by improper means · Seoul Eastern District Court
• Court upholds departure order for foreign national fined for drunk driving · Daegu District Court

See all 28 rulings on Criminal Cases →

Frequently asked questions

Who was tried?

A Chinese national who was deported for illegal stay and then entered Korea again. The person entered while an entry ban was in effect.

How did the court rule?

The court found that the defendant could not explain the change of name and offered no evidence. It concluded that the defendant kept the official from recognizing them as the same person, and imposed 10 months in prison, suspended for 2 years.

Does this result apply as-is to similar cases?

It is the judgment in this case only and does not apply as-is to other cases.