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) Plaintiff’s entry into the Republic of Korea and refugee application - Plaintiff’s nationality: Marocco - Entry and refugee application: November 11, 2014 (Status of Sojourn: Exemption of Visa (B-1)) / Application for refugee recognition on February 4, 2015
B. The Defendant’s decision not to recognize refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) - Grounds for not recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”): No sufficiently-founded fear of fear that is likely to be harmful to gambling may be recognized.
(c) Plaintiff’s objection and decision of dismissal - Decision of dismissal: The fact that no dispute exists on September 24, 2015 (based on recognition), Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul’s statement of evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff alleged that Morocco reported and arrested narcotics manufacturers to the police, and later, they may be threatened with life when Morocco returned to the Republic of Korea due to intimidation by the narcotics organization. Thus, there is a well-founded fear that there is a sufficient ground to recognize that booming may be caused on the ground of a member of a specific social group's status.
B. Determination 1) Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act provides that “Refugee” means a foreigner who is unable or does not want to be protected by the country of nationality due to well-founded fear to recognize that he/she may be injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a specific social group, or political opinion, or a stateless foreigner who is unable or does not want to return to the country in which he/she had resided before entering the Republic of Korea due to such fear.” In full view of the following circumstances revealed by adding the whole purport of the pleadings to the evidence as stated in subparagraph 2) and the evidence stated in subparagraph 4, as well as the evidence stated in subparagraph 4, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff has “a well-founded fear on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion,” and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this.