'Behavioral Misconduct' Due to Signal Violation? A Chinese National's Struggle for Korean Naturalization [Seocho-dong Legal Story]

The photo is unrelated to the article content. [Image source=Yonhap News]

▲Article 5 of the Nationality Act (General Naturalization Requirements)

: For a foreigner to receive 'naturalization approval', (omitted) the following requirements must be met.

1. Must have continuously resided in the Republic of Korea for more than 5 years and hold a residence status that allows permanent residence in Korea.
2. Must be of legal adult age under Korean civil law.

3. Must meet the 'good conduct' requirements as prescribed by the Ministry of Justice regulations, including compliance with laws.
…

Mr. A, a Chinese national, wanted to become Korean. He entered Korea in 2013 with a short-term visit (C-3) visa and later changed his residence status to foreign national compatriot (F-4). On December 11, 2018, he applied to the Ministry of Justice for general naturalization approval.

On August 4, 2020, he received the long-awaited 'naturalization application approval' text message from the Immigration and Foreigners Policy Headquarters under the Ministry of Justice. "Those who receive naturalization approval will acquire Korean nationality upon taking the national oath before the Minister of Justice and receiving the certificate of nationality. Within 1 to 2 months, a message regarding the certificate awarding ceremony will be sent from the immigration office."

Accordingly, Mr. A submitted a handwritten signature on the national oath on September 10 of that year, but about two months later, he received a 'naturalization denial' notice. The Ministry of Justice judged that Mr. A "did not meet the good conduct requirement under Article 5, Clause 3 of the Nationality Act."

This was because Mr. A had received a summary order with a fine of 1 million KRW for violating the Special Act on Traffic Accident Handling (injury) on September 28 of the same year. A summary order is when a prosecutor requests a fine or penalty through written review only, and the court issues a sentence by reviewing documents without a formal trial.

It was investigated that around 11 p.m. on July 13, one month before receiving the naturalization approval message, Mr. A was driving a city bus at a three-way intersection in front of a high school in Bucheon, Gyeonggi Province, and while turning left at a red light, hit a pedestrian crossing the crosswalk, causing injuries requiring two weeks of medical treatment.

Mr. A appealed this decision to the Administrative Court. During the trial, Mr. A's side argued, "After notifying the naturalization approval and even receiving the national oath, the Ministry of Justice re-examined the naturalization requirements without legal grounds and denied naturalization," and "the summary order occurred after the naturalization approval notification, so it cannot be grounds for cancellation of approval, and there was procedural illegality as no opportunity to explain was given."

Mr. A also argued that "the good conduct requirement should be based on conduct and behavior that do not hinder being a member of Korean society," and "even considering the content of the summary order, it is not sufficient to deem the conduct as not good, so the denial is an abuse and deviation of discretion."

The first trial ruled in favor of Mr. A. On the 15th, the Seoul Administrative Court Administrative Division 6 (Presiding Judge Lee Ju-young) announced a recent ruling in favor of the plaintiff in the lawsuit filed by Mr. A against the Minister of Justice to cancel the denial of naturalization application.

The court first judged that the naturalization approval was already established by the naturalization application approval text message. It explained, "Notification of naturalization approval is made according to the enforcement decree of the Nationality Act by designating the date and place for taking the national oath and receiving the naturalization certificate, and requiring attendance at the designated date and place, and the message content sufficiently meets the form of such notification."

Furthermore, "Although the sender was the Immigration and Foreigners Policy Headquarters, not the Ministry of Justice, since the headquarters is a subordinate organization of the Ministry of Justice and the head of the headquarters handles matters related to acquisition and loss of nationality, the subject of this notification should be considered the Ministry of Justice," adding, "The notification met all requirements of subject, content, procedure, and form."

The Ministry of Justice argued, "The text message method is not a lawful notification method under the Administrative Procedures Act, so this notification cannot be considered a disposition," but the court rejected this, stating, "According to the enforcement decree of the Nationality Act and related guidelines, the notification letter must be delivered directly to the person or sent by mail, and this can sufficiently include notification by text message."

The court added, "Even if the summary order occurred, considering its content, it is difficult to see it as a serious defect that would invalidate or cancel the already made notification," and "Moreover, there was procedural illegality as Mr. A was not given an opportunity to explain."

The Ministry of Justice appealed this ruling.