난민인정심사불회부결정 취소
1. On January 7, 2016, the Defendant’s decision not to return refugee status review against the Plaintiff is revoked.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On December 30, 2015, the Plaintiff, as a man of the nationality of the Republic of Syria (hereinafter “Syria”), submitted an application for refugee status to the Defendant on January 1, 2016, upon arrival at the Incheon State supply port.
(hereinafter “instant application”) b.
On January 7, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision not to return refugee status screening (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that “The application for refugee status falls under the case where a safe country with no possibility of gambling has been from a safe country or has been established from a safe country, or solely seeking refugee status for economic reasons, and there is no reason to return refugee status screening under Article 5 subparag. 4 and 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the Refugee Act.”
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful
A. The Defendant’s principal safety defense 1) The instant disposition is merely an internal decision-making, which is the premise for the refusal of entry into the Republic of Korea, and thus, the instant disposition is not subject to judicial review, since the disposition on entry into the Republic of Korea is an act of a sovereign state in accordance with international law. Thus, the instant disposition cannot be subject to judicial review. (2) Although the refugee recognition application system at the port of entry and departure under Article 6 of the Refugee Act constitutes grounds for entry into the Republic of Korea under the Immigration Control Act, it is a system that allows entry into the Republic of Korea in exceptional cases based on humanitarian consideration. Thus, the Plaintiff’s application for refugee recognition through such a system is merely an anti-private interest that occurred in the process of establishing legal basis for the system, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff has the right under laws or sound reasoning to request the Defendant to submit the refugee recognition examination to the Defendant. Thus, the instant disposition
3. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit in this case is unlawful.
(b).