난민불인정처분취소
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On February 17, 2016, the Plaintiff entered the country of Indian nationality as a foreigner of short-term general (C3-1) sojourn status, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on March 22, 2016.
B. On April 20, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision to deny refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff does not constitute a case of “a well-founded fear of persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees and the Status of Refugees.
C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on April 28, 2016, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on June 8, 2017.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. As to the Plaintiff’s petitioning for the revocation of the instant disposition regarding the instant defense, the Defendant asserted that the instant lawsuit was unlawful, which was filed after the lapse of the period for filing the lawsuit.
Pursuant to Article 20(1) of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 20(1) of the Refugee Act, and Article 21(1) and (2) of the Refugee Act, a person who has received a decision not to recognize refugee status may file an objection with the Minister of Justice within 30 days from the date of receipt of the notification, and the person who filed an objection is entitled to file a revocation lawsuit within 90 days from the date of receipt of the notification of the decision not to dismiss the objection. If the Plaintiff’s notice of decision not to dismiss the objection of this case was received on June 29, 2017, and the Plaintiff’s notice of decision not to dismiss the objection of this case was clearly stated in the record that the lawsuit of this case was filed on December 21, 2017, since the period for filing the lawsuit of this case is expired after the lapse of the period for filing the lawsuit.
3. As such, the instant lawsuit is unlawful, and it is so decided as per Disposition.