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

A. On November 19, 2008, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea on November 19, 2008, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on July 4, 2016.

B. On July 18, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff cannot be deemed as having “a sufficiently-founded fear of persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.

C. On July 26, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice, but was dismissed on April 21, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Evidence Nos. 1 through 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff is likely to be injured by the Government if he/she returns to his/her home country as a trainee of Pakistan.

Nevertheless, the instant disposition that did not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee is unlawful.

B. “persecution” that serves as a requirement for recognition of refugee status 1 refers to “an act causing serious infringement or discrimination against essential human dignity, including threats to life, body, or freedom.” A foreigner who files an application for recognition of refugee status must prove that such persecution is “a sufficient well-founded fear.”

Therefore, in order to be recognized as a refugee, a person who has entered Korea by being subject to punishment in China due to arrest or detention, and returned to China, who has sufficient fear that the Chinese government might be harmed if he/she returned to China, or the Chinese government returns to China due to active and leading activities related to the Rose of Sharon while staying in Korea.