난민불인정결정취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. In the course of the disposition, the following facts: (a) short-term stay visit (C-3) on March 3, 2016 of the date of entry into the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea on March 3, 2016; (b) the date of the application for refugee status recognition (hereinafter “instant disposition”); (c) November 7, 2016, the date of the application for refugee status recognition; (c) the date of the decision on March 11, 2016; and (d) there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition of the decision of dismissal of the decision of February 24, 2017 as of the date of the application for objection that the notification cannot sufficiently be recognized as being detrimental to the refugee status: (c) the facts that there is no ground for recognition of the decision of dismissal of the decision of February 24,
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a national of the Republic of Senegal (hereinafter “Senegal”).
The plaintiff was born at Muslim home.
However, the plaintiff did not believe Islamic teaching.
The plaintiff's family and village users threatened the death of the plaintiff.
The Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea regardless of the damage to the Republic of Korea.
As can be seen, if the Plaintiff returned to the Republic of Korea, it is likely to be threatened on the ground that he/she is a person without a personal interest.
B. Determination 1) Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act defines a refugee as “a foreigner who is unable to be protected or does not want to be protected by the country of nationality due to well-founded fear to recognize that he/she may be injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion, or a foreigner who is not a national who, due to such fear, is unable to return to or does not want to return to the country of nationality before entering the Republic of Korea.” 2) In full view of the aforementioned evidence and the purport of the entire arguments as stated in Articles 3 and 4 as well as the following circumstances, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff has “a well-founded fear on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.”