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 March 31, 2017, the Plaintiff, as a Egypt nationality, entered the Republic of Korea with tourism Tong (B-2) sojourn status on March 31, 2017, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on May 17, 2017.
B. On August 4, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision on the recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute a case of “a well-founded fear that would be subject to persecution” as a requirement of refugee under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff asserted that he worked in the company of household appliances. While driving the company's goods, the company's goods were taken away from the stolen goods while driving the vehicle, and later, the company president demanded that the company compensate for the value of the goods, thereby threatening the police to report the company's goods.
Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case which did not recognize the plaintiff as a refugee despite high possibility that the plaintiff would be subject to gambling when he returns to the country of nationality is illegal.
B. The term “refugee” refers to a foreigner who is unable 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, status as a member of a particular social group, or political opinion, or a stateless foreigner who, owing to such fear, is unable to return to or does not want to return to the country in which he/she resided before entering the Republic of Korea.
(Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act. However, even if the Plaintiff’s assertion is acknowledged, the threat of the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute persecution on the ground of “human race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a specific social group, or political opinion.”