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

A. On December 13, 2005, the Plaintiff, a national of the Republic of Pakistan (hereinafter referred to as “Pakistan”) of the Republic of Pakistan, entered the Republic of Korea on December 13, 2005, and stayed in the Republic of Korea as a training employment (E-8) or a non-professional employment (E-9) sojourn status, left the Republic of Korea on December 7, 2008, and returned again on January 27, 2009, and stayed in the Republic of Korea on a non-professional employment (E-9) sojourn status, and applied for refugee recognition to the Defendant on July 8, 2015, after the expiration of the period of sojourn (E-9 February 20, 2012).

B. On July 20, 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] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. On January 2009, the Plaintiff asserted that he had been staying in the Republic of Korea and returned to the Republic of Korea with Pakistan, and that there was a lack of electricity in Switzerland and non-resident areas, and led the Plaintiff to the demonstration as seen earlier, which is an electrical company, by gathering 10 to 15 people in the electricity shortage situation.

The plaintiff's altitude was an area where lele, a Islamic Islamic political organization, frequently passed away, but the lelebane prevented people from participating in the assembly or exercising violence in their own area.

The Plaintiff’s leading demonstration was also focused on the sloping, and the 15-20 staff members of the sloping team found the demonstration team, and assaulted people with tree enormouss and guns, and at the time the Plaintiff was injured.

Although the plaintiff reported this to the police, the police did not start the investigation or arrest of the police.

Rather, it is preparing retaliation against the plaintiff who reported to the police, and November 2014.