난민불인정결정취소
The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The judgment of the first instance.
1. The summary of the case and the facts premised on the case
A. The summary of the instant case pertains to the case where the Plaintiff, who is the Republic of mentmen, applied for recognition of refugee status against the Defendant based on the Refugee Act, but was rejected by the Defendant to deny recognition of the Plaintiff’s refugee status, asserting that the Plaintiff satisfied the requirements for recognition of refugee status and sought revocation of the disposition that did not recognize the Plaintiff’s refugee status.
The judgment of the first instance dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on the ground that there is no fear that there is sufficient grounds for persecution as prescribed in Article 1 of the Refugee Convention and Article 1 of the Refugee Protocol, and the Plaintiff appealed against this.
[Attachment of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes]
B. The premise factual basis 【Evidence 【A’1, 2, and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings, (i) the Plaintiff is a male (C) of the nationality of mentmen, and the Defendant is the head of the Immigration Office to whom the Minister of Justice delegated the authority to recognize the status of a refugee pursuant to Articles 8 and 46 of the Refugee Act and Article 24 subparag. 4 of the Enforcement Decree
B. On December 30, 2014, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea as a medical tourism status (C-3) and applied for recognition of refugee status to the Defendant on January 9, 2015.
However, on January 30, 2015, the Defendant rejected the recognition of the status of a refugee against the Plaintiff on the ground that the “sufficient fear of persecution” prescribed as a requirement for recognition of a refugee status under Article 1 of the Refugee Convention and Article 1 of the Refugee Protocol is not recognized.
(1) On March 20, 2015, the Plaintiff’s objection and the decision of dismissal by the Minister of Justice on March 20, 2015, filed an objection with the Minister of Justice based on Article 21(1) of the Refugee Act. However, on September 24, 2015, the Minister of Justice dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on the ground that the Plaintiff failed to meet the requirements for recognition of refugee status, and this is on December 11, 2015.