난민불인정처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
(a) Plaintiff’s entry into the Republic of Korea and refugee application - Plaintiff’s nationality: Egypt - Entry into the Republic of Korea and refugee application: November 29, 2013 (Status of Sojourn: Tourism Tong (B-2)) / Application for refugee recognition on August 3, 2015
B. The Defendant’s decision not to recognize refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) - Grounds for not recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”): No sufficiently-founded fear of fear that is likely to be harmful to gambling may be recognized.
(c) Plaintiff’s objection and decision of dismissal - Decision of dismissal: The fact that there is no dispute on June 30, 2016 / [based on recognition], Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul’s each entry, 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that: (a) the Plaintiff joined, around 2011, Egypt’s youth civic organizations called “4th day” in Egypt and withdrawn from, around January 2013; (b) on the ground that Egypt’s return to Korea could result in gambling; and (c) thus, the Plaintiff ought to be recognized as a refugee. (b) As such, Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act provides that the Plaintiff’s disposition of this case is lawful, on the grounds of well-founded fear to recognize that “refugee” is likely to be harmful for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion, due to such fear, means a foreigner who is unable to be protected or who does not want to be protected of the country of nationality, or a foreigner who does not want to be returned to, the country of nationality who resided in the Republic of Korea before entering the Republic of Korea due to such fear; (b) comprehensively considering the following circumstances revealed by the evidence as seen earlier, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff’s refusal of this case is justifiable.
① On November 29, 2013, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea as the status of stay for the Tourism Center (B-2).