난민불인정결정취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited this case, is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following, thereby citing this case as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article
2. The plaintiff asserts that, in the case of returning from the trial of the party to Pakistan, the plaintiff asserts that there is a fear that sufficient grounds for gambling in Pakistan, a country of nationality, are recognized, since the plaintiff is placed in a clear situation where it is obvious that the worker B, who is a shotology, needs to open the plaintiff to Islamic school while demanding the plaintiff, who is a shotology, who is a shotology, to go back to
However, in full view of the following: (a) the religious policy, judicial system, and public order of Pakistan admitted by the evidence adopted by the first instance court cited earlier; (b) the specific content and character of the Plaintiff’s gambling; (c) the Plaintiff’s entry route; and (d) the details of the Plaintiff’s application for refugee status, etc., it does not appear that there is a sufficient evidence to deem that there exists a concern for the Plaintiff’s religious or social
The data submitted by the Plaintiff in the trial is not clear as to the document, and it is merely a statement of the Plaintiff’s punishment, etc. as a suspect when reporting the thief damage to B even if it is true.
The above circumstance alone alone is insufficient to deem that there was an imminent situation to the extent that the Plaintiff was able to serve as the ground for recognition of refugee status.
(E) The plaintiff's assertion is not accepted according to the fact that he/she is not aware of his/her intention in his/her own judicial procedure.
3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion shall be dismissed on the ground that the plaintiff's claim is without merit.
The judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable in conclusion as above.
Therefore, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed because it is without merit.