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. On February 18, 2009, the Plaintiff, a foreigner with the nationality of Pakistan, entered the Republic of Korea with the status of non-professional employment (E-9) sojourn and obtained permission for extension of sojourn period three times until December 17, 2013. On December 9, 2013, the date eight days before the expiration of the above sojourn period, the Plaintiff filed an application for recognition of refugee status with the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “instant application”) by asserting that “the Plaintiff is a party member of Pakistan (Pakistan Trek-e-Saf) of Pakistan,” during a meeting held at the party office on September 17, 2012, while being threatened by a total attack from the party members of the PLN (Paist Mus L-Laz).”
B. On July 15, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition of non-recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute a well-founded fear that he would be subject to persecution as prescribed in Article 1 of the Refugee Convention and Article 1 of the Refugee Protocol” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on September 22, 2014, but was dismissed on July 1, 2015, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on September 7, 2015.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant disposition
A. From January 2008 to September 2012, 2012, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff worked as the representative of the PTPP village. On September 17, 2012, six PEN members, who were in charge of a meeting at the office of the PTPP Party, brought a weapon and went into the office by cultivating a event event. During that process, one PEI member entered the office.
As above, the plaintiff was threatened by the PMFN members, which is a different area.