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. The Plaintiff, a Egypt nationality, entered the Republic of Korea on September 10, 2015, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on November 24, 2015.
B. On January 13, 2016, 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 requirement of refugee under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees.
C. The Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on February 18, 2016, but the said objection was dismissed on September 9, 2016.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3, 4, Eul 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff changed the course from Islamic schools to Sasiology, and on this ground, the foreign third village threatens the plaintiff.
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. 1) The term “refugee” refers to a foreigner who is unable or does not want to be protected due to well-founded fear that he/she may be harmed on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a specific social group, or political opinion, or a foreigner who is not able to return to, or does not want to return to, the country of his/her own residence before entering the Republic of Korea due to such fear (Article 2 subparag. 1). 2 of the Refugee Act), which is a requirement for refugee recognition, refers to “an act causing serious infringement of, or discrimination against, essential human dignity, including threats to life, body, or freedom.” Such fear is “a sufficient fear.”