beta
(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.06.01 2017구단4584

난민불인정결정취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On September 15, 2003, the Plaintiff entered the country as a foreigner of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (hereinafter “L-1”) nationality and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on October 11, 2016 after the expiration of the period of stay ( December 15, 2003).

On October 31, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-recognition of refugee status (hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute “a sufficiently-founded fear that it would be prejudicial to persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter referred to as “Refugee”) and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (hereinafter referred to as “Refugee Protocol”).

On November 11, 2016, the Plaintiff received a notice of decision on non-recognition of refugee status.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) the Plaintiff operated two enterprises in his own country of Bangladesh, and was threatened to pay money for the first time on July 2003 from local violence; and (b) has been continuously threatened until now.

As such, the disposition of this case which the plaintiff did not recognize as a refugee despite the possibility that the plaintiff might be subject to gambling from violence in his own country is unlawful.

B. In full view of the provisions of Article 2 subparag. 1 and Article 18 of the former Refugee Act, Article 1 of the Refugee Convention, and Article 1 of the Refugee Protocol, foreigners who, owing to well-founded fear of being injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, are unable to be protected of the country of nationality or who does not want to be protected of the country of nationality due to such fear, or who, owing to such fear, could not return to or does not want to return to the country in which he had resided before entering the Republic of Korea.