난민불인정처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of disposition;
A. On May 3, 2016, the Plaintiff, who is a foreigner of the South African Republic of South Africa (hereinafter referred to as “ South Africa”), entered the Republic of Korea as the sojourn status of the Tourism Department (B-2, the sojourn period of 30 days) and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on May 10, 2016.
B. On September 5, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision to recognize refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff does not constitute a case where there is a well-founded fear that is a requirement for refugee status as prescribed by Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1 and 2, Eul No. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion is the plaintiff's remaining person of public nationality of Pakistan, and since the store was assaulted by xenhoba due to xenhoba, the number of men with 9 to 10 men with the remaining public domain, there is sufficient concern that it would be imminent for the plaintiff to go home to the public and that it is a reasonable fear, but the disposition of this case which did not recognize it on a different premise is unlawful.
(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;
C. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff has “a well-founded fear of persecution on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion,” even if all evidence and arguments submitted by the Plaintiff were considered, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
① In addition to the Plaintiff’s statement, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff was subject to an attack due to the mistake of foreigners in its home country, the Plaintiff’s home country also came to January 2017, which was after entry into the Republic of Korea, and the Plaintiff.