beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.06.23 2016구합50840

난민인정심사불회부결정 취소

Text

1. On January 5, 2016, the Defendant’s decision not to refer to refugee status review rendered against the Plaintiff is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 28, 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 December 30, 2015, upon arrival at the Incheon State supply port.

(hereinafter “instant application”). (b)

On January 5, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision not to return refugee status screening (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff was a safe country with no possibility of gambling or safe country, or an application for refugee status is clearly groundless because it falls under cases where the application for refugee status is not clearly justified, such as where he/she was recognized as a safe country with no possibility of gambling, or solely intends to obtain refugee status for economic reasons.”

[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. Defendant’s principal safety defense 1) The instant disposition is merely an internal decision-making, which is the premise of the denial of entry, and thus, the disposition on entry permission by a foreigner 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 entry and departure ports under Article 6 of the Refugee Act constitutes grounds for entry prohibition under the Immigration Control Act, the instant disposition is a system that allows entry to be made in exceptional cases by 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 cannot be deemed as having the right under laws or sound reasoning that may request the Plaintiff to submit the refugee recognition application to the Plaintiff. Thus, the instant disposition cannot be deemed an administrative disposition subject to appeal litigation, and the Plaintiff is not entitled to have standing to sue in administrative litigation.

3. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case.