2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On September 7, 2015, the Plaintiff, a foreigner of the UAE (hereinafter referred to as “Egypt”), who is a foreigner of the nationality of the UAE (hereinafter referred to as “Egypt”), entered the Republic of Korea as the sojourn status of the Tourism Department (30 days of stay) and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on November 17, 2015.

B. On November 18, 2016, the Defendant issued a notification of refugee status refusal (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that it does not constitute a case where there is a well-founded fear, which is a requirement for refugee status, under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.

C. On November 18, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on November 18, 2016, but was dismissed on April 21, 2017.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1 and 2, Eul No. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s experience in participating in the demonstration that supported the regime at Egypt’s assertion. If the Plaintiff returned to the Republic of Korea with Egypt, the concerns of being stuffed from the current regime are sufficiently existing on the ground of the foregoing demonstration power, and this is a reasonable fear. However, the instant disposition that did not recognize it on a different premise is unlawful.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff has “a well-founded fear of persecution on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion,” even if all evidence and arguments submitted by the Plaintiff were considered, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

① In the interview and investigation, the Plaintiff only participated in the demonstration supported by the regime at any time without knowledge, and has received other attention.