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

A. The Plaintiff, a national of the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter “China”), entered the Republic of Korea on a short-term visit (C-3) on December 27, 2016, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on December 30, 2016.

B. On July 11, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition to deny the Plaintiff’s application for refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute “a well-founded fear of persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Refugee Convention and Article 1 of the Refugee Protocol.

[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. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is likely to be arrested in the official document if he returns to the Republic of Korea, since the plaintiff received training of the patriarche in China.

For this reason, the disposition of this case which did not recognize the plaintiff as a refugee even though the plaintiff could be affected by gambling when he returns home to his country is illegal.

B. “persecution” that serves as a requirement for recognition of refugee status 1 refers to “an act causing serious infringement or discrimination against essential human dignity, including threats to life, body, or freedom.” A foreigner who files an application for recognition of refugee status must prove that such persecution is “a sufficient well-founded fear.”

Therefore, in order to be recognized as a refugee, a person who has entered Korea by being subject to punishment in China due to arrest or detention, and returned to China, who has a well-founded fear that the Chinese government might be harmed if he/she returned to China, or a person who has a positive and leading activity related to the Rose of Sharon while staying in Korea and returned to China.