난민불인정결정취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On December 19, 2016, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea as a foreigner of the nationality of the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter “China”), and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on December 20, 2016, by entering the Republic of Korea as a short-term visit (C-3) sojourn status.
B. On November 22, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision on the recognition of refugee status on the ground that the “ sufficiently based fears that the Plaintiff would be subject to persecution” stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees cannot be recognized.
(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.
The Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on December 14, 2017, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the objection on November 29, 2018.
【Fact-finding without a dispute over the basis of recognition】 Facts, Gap evidence 1 through 4, and Eul evidence 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. From 2003, the Plaintiff’s assertion began training upon introduction of the patriarche who dealt with the patriarche from workplace rent.
In around 2015, the Plaintiff participated in the demonstration against the government that led to the suppression of the trainees of the Korean War in China, and participated in the government's improper act as a group of the National People's Prosecutor's Office in China. Accordingly, the Plaintiff's official proposal in China was found in the Plaintiff's house and the workplace in order to arrest the Plaintiff.
The Chinese government is strongly suppressing the pathic womb, and when the plaintiff returns to his own country, it is likely to threaten the life or physical freedom of the Chinese government on the ground of the training of the pathic Rose.
Nevertheless, the disposition of this case which rejected the Plaintiff’s application for refugee status should be revoked as it is unlawful.
B. Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act is sufficient to recognize that refugee status may be respected on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a specific social group or political opinion.