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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. The reasoning for this case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this case is cited by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. The Plaintiff asserts that, if she returns from the Sinria in the trial of the party, she is placed in a situation in which she could be threatened with life from members of the AGBA-OCC-UCITRT SOCTY (AGL) as an all-inclusive organization, and therefore, there has been a well-founded fear of persecution against the Plaintiff.

However, in full view of the facts admitted by the first instance court’s adopted evidence, there is no sufficient fear that the Plaintiff might be injured on the ground of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, religious opinion, etc.

Even if some of the facts alleged by the plaintiff are acknowledged, it is judged that the plaintiff could avoid the relevant gambling by being protected by the Austrian Government or settled in other areas within Austrian.

According to this, the plaintiff's assertion is not accepted.

2. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion shall be dismissed on the ground that the plaintiff's claim is without merit.

The judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable in conclusion as above.

Therefore, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed because it is without merit.