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 January 31, 2016, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea with a short-term visit (C-3) sojourn status on a short-term basis, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on February 26, 2016.
B. On November 21, 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 refugee requirement under 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 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 was threatened with murder on the ground that the Plaintiff worked in Pakistan as a farm, was subject to labor exploitation from the owner of the farm, was assaulted, and was not likely to have been committed.
Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case which did not recognize the plaintiff as a refugee despite high possibility that the plaintiff would be subject to gambling when he returns to the country of nationality is illegal.
B. The term “refugee” refers to 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, or a stateless foreigner who, owing to such fear, is unable to return to or does not want to return to the country in which he/she resided before entering the Republic of Korea.
(Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act. However, even if the Plaintiff’s assertion is acknowledged, the threat of the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute persecution on the ground of “a race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a particular social group, or political opinion,” and it is merely a private dispute, and thus, the judicial system of the country of nationality.