난민불인정결정취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The Plaintiff is a four-presidential foreigner.
On May 7, 2015, the Plaintiff applied for refugee status to the Defendant.
On June 25, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision not to recognize refugee status on the ground that “a well-founded fear of persecution” against the Plaintiff is not recognized.
(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Ground for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The Plaintiff alleged that the Plaintiff is likely to be subject to intimidation from Samykta Jya Muti Mucti Mora (hereinafter “SJM”), which is an unlawful organization, and thus, the instant disposition is unlawful.
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.
(No. 1) Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act, which is a requirement for recognition of refugee status, refers to “any act causing serious infringement or discrimination on essential human dignity, including threats to life, body, or freedom,” and the fact that there is a “comfortable fear” subject to such persecution must be attested by a foreigner who files an application for recognition of refugee status.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2013Du14269, Mar. 10, 2016; 2012Du14378, Apr. 25, 2013). In cases where the Plaintiff returned to a country of nationality, there is no evidence to deem that there is a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a specific social group, or political opinion.
Even if the plaintiff is likely to be subject to either sJM's subscription to organization and contribution to donations.