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. The Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea on June 6, 2016, as an alien of the nationality of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (hereinafter “Ethiopia”), with the status of stay D-4 (General Training) of Ethiopia (hereinafter “Ethiopia”).
B. On June 29, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for recognition of refugee status with the Defendant, but on August 1, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition for recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that it is difficult to recognize “the well-founded fear that there is a risk of persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Convention”) and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Protocol”) and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Protocol”).
C. On September 27, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice against the instant disposition. However, the Minister of Justice dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on the same ground as on June 12, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 3, and the purport of whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. On December 2012, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff joined as a party member of B Party B (C party) who is Ethiopia Party B (C party) and then was engaged in public relations activities of the said party.
Around January 2016, the Plaintiff was arrested and detained for about four days on the ground that he/she engaged in B party support activities, and was released from custody for about four days. However, the Plaintiff did not promote at the following work place and did not increase the amount of wages. If the Plaintiff returned to Ethiopia, a member of the B party, it is likely to be threatened with Ethiopia Government and the B Party’s physical freedom on the ground that he/she is a member of the B party.
Nevertheless, the defendant's disposition of this case which did not accept the plaintiff's application for refugee status.