난민불인정결정취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On March 5, 2014, the Plaintiff, a national of the Republic of Chicago (hereinafter referred to as “C-3”), filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on March 12, 2014, when entering the Republic of Korea for a short-term visit (C-3) and staying there on a short-term basis, and on March 12, 2014, prior to the expiration of the period of stay ( April 4, 2014)
B. On February 12, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision to deny refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff does not constitute a case where there is a well-founded fear that the Plaintiff would be subject to persecution” as prescribed by Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion was caused by a trouble in the village development period for more than a week in Kamera, and during that process, the plaintiff participated in the demonstration for the re-operation of the power plant, and there was an act of gradually overworking the demonstration, and the plaintiff was arrested at the police station in Kamera.
The plaintiff, while being transferred to the court for a trial after the arrest, could escape from the gap in which other criminals are tensiond with the expenses, and he moved to the Thailand and went to the Republic of Korea.
Therefore, the Plaintiff constitutes a refugee who could be threatened with life, body or freedom due to his/her career of participation in demonstration at the time of return.
Nevertheless, the instant disposition made by the Defendant on a different premise is unlawful.
(b) The definitions of terms used in this Act shall be as follows:
1. “Refugee” means a person who is unable or would be entitled to receive protection from a State of nationality due to well-founded fear that he/she may be injured on the ground of race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a particular social group, or political opinion.