난민불인정결정취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. In the course of the disposition, the short-term sojourn status visit (C-3) on June 30, 2014, the date of entry into the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea with the Plaintiff’s nationality, which was the date of the application for refugee status recognition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) and on July 23, 2014, the date of the application for refugee status recognition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) was July 23, 2014: The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition of the decision of rejection of the decision of October 11, 2016 as of the date of the application for objection that there is no sufficient ground for recognition of refugee status status status rejection: Gap, evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul, 1, 2, and 29 as of the date of the application for objection; and the purport of the entire pleadings as of the whole
2. The defendant asserts that there is no benefit to seek the revocation of the disposition of this case since the plaintiff legally stays in Korea with humanitarian stay permission.
In light of the foregoing, the Plaintiff’s interest in seeking the cancellation of the refugee non-recognition disposition is lost on the ground that the Plaintiff was issued a humanitarian stay permit for the Plaintiff in accordance with separate requirements and procedures.
Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.
3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion is a person of nationality of the Republic of Diplomatic Affairs (hereinafter referred to as "Chodi").
On June 2013, the Plaintiff joined mD (Mouve Management la slur et al.) and participated in meetings or recruited party members from that time. As a result, the Plaintiff was threatened by the people or the police who belong to the youth organization of the CND-FD, which is a party, de ladra la de ladr la ladr la de ladr ladr la de ladr ladre.
Accordingly, the plaintiff has been in the Republic of Korea, regardless of his vice versa.
As such, the Plaintiff’s return to Jindi is likely to pose another threat from the party or the police on the ground that he/she performed the work as a party, and thus, he/she should be recognized as a refugee.
(b) judgment;