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

On October 10, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on October 16, 2014 while entering the Republic of Canada for short-term visit visa (C-3 and 30 days of stay) and staying there.

On July 20, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-approval of the Plaintiff’s application for refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute “a well-founded fear of persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Refugee Convention and Article 1 of the Refugee Protocol.

The Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on August 10, 2015, but the said objection was dismissed on the same ground as December 14, 2015.

【The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the instant disposition indicated in Gap’s No. 1 through 4 and Eul’s No. 1 through 3 was served as a pharmacist in Kamera. The Plaintiff was arrested by giving her her safly, and was arrested to criminal trial, and entered the Republic of Korea with strong influence in Kamera.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case that did not recognize the plaintiff as a refugee is unlawful even though the possibility that the plaintiff might be stuffed due to the above circumstances is high in case the plaintiff returned to Kamera.

Judgment

In addition to the above-mentioned facts, it is insufficient to view that there is a well-founded fear of persecution to the Plaintiff in full view of the following circumstances, which can be known when adding the description of No. 4 and the purport of the entire argument, and the Defendant’s disposition of this case is lawful since there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The grounds alleged by the Plaintiff are personal disputes or criminal crimes and do not constitute a ground for recognition of refugee status under the Refugee Act by itself.

The Korean culture and the judicial system are different from Korea.