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

A. The Plaintiff, a Egypt nationality, entered Korea on August 28, 2014, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on September 3, 2014.

B. On October 19, 2015, 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.

C. The Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on November 18, 2015, but the said objection was dismissed on the same ground as October 27, 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 has been rarely arrested in Egypt with an unslock-type group for one month, and has been in the Republic of Korea to support his/her family since Egypt's economic situation is difficult and there is no job.

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). We examine the Plaintiff’s assertion, and even if recognizing the Plaintiff’s assertion, the threat of the Plaintiff’s threat is on the ground of “human race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a specific social group or political opinion.”