2. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.

3...

A. The Plaintiff, a Egypt nationality, entered Korea on April 4, 2017, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on April 26, 2017.

B. On May 26, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision on the recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute a case of “a well-founded fear that would be subject to persecution” as a requirement of refugee under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The head of Egypt’s primary claim does not have freedom, security, justice, and democracy, and any person may be subject to suppression from the Egypt government. In addition, the Plaintiff reported the Plaintiff to the police and issued a warrant of arrest against the Plaintiff. Therefore, even if the Plaintiff’s primary claim does not fall under refugee status under the Refugee Act, even if the Plaintiff’s primary claim does not fall under refugee status under the Refugee Act, the Plaintiff constitutes a person with reasonable grounds to recognize that his/her life or physical freedom, etc. may be considerably infringed due to the non-human treatment, punishment, or other circumstances, and thus, the Defendant ought to permit the Plaintiff to stay humanitarian sojourn under Article 2 subparag. 3 of the Refugee Act.

B. With respect to the primary claim for judgment 1, the term “refugee” is 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 particular social group, or political opinion.