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

A. On February 17, 2011, the Plaintiff filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on June 12, 201, which was after May 18, 201, when the period of stay expired, on May 12, 2012, when the Plaintiff was a foreigner of the Republic of India (hereinafter “ India”), and entered the Republic of Korea for a short term (C-3 and the period of stay 30 days) sojourn.

B. On May 14, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute a case of “a well-founded fear that would be prejudicial to persecution” as a requirement of refugee 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 appealed and filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on May 27, 2014, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the said objection on December 16, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In the Plaintiff’s assertion, there is serious conflict between the party of the Aknife month and the party of the scare.

Around August 2010, the Plaintiff, a supporting party of the Scargs Party, was recommended by B (hereinafter “the instant crime”), which is a political party of the Acargs Month, to support the Acarg Month political party. In the process of refusal, the Plaintiff made a dispute in the process of refusing it, and thereafter, told that the instant crime of intimidation from the villagers would not leave the Plaintiff.

Therefore, since the Plaintiff’s return to India is likely to be detrimental to the crime of intimidation for the foregoing reasons, the instant disposition taken on a different premise is unlawful.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

C. It can be seen by adding up the respective descriptions of the evidence Nos. 3 and 4 and the purport of the entire pleadings.