2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On November 23, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on January 19, 2015, while entering the Republic of Egypt (hereinafter “Egypt”) and staying there in the Republic of Korea as a foreigner of the nationality of the Republic of Egypt (hereinafter “Egypt”).

B. On February 6, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition that does not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute “a sufficiently based fear that she would be injured” as stipulated in the Refugee Act and the Convention on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. On March 6, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on March 6, 2016, but rendered a final decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s application on February 24, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the disposition

A. The Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion caused the Plaintiff’s death of pedestrians while driving a bus. For this reason, the victim’s family members threatened the Plaintiff with the Plaintiff’s whereabouts and murder of the Plaintiff.

Therefore, if the Plaintiff returned to Egypt, the Defendant’s disposition that did not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee is unlawful even though it is highly likely that the Plaintiff might be stuffed due to the above circumstances.

B. In order to be recognized as a refugee, in addition to the requirement that the applicant for refugee status has a well-founded fear of persecution in his or her country, the applicant has been made on the ground of “a person’s race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a particular social group or political opinion”.

The reason for the persecution alleged by the Plaintiff is that “the Plaintiff’s punishment is threatened by the family members of the person who died due to a traffic accident,” and even if the Plaintiff’s assertion is recognized, this is a private threat, and the Egypt government is imminent.