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

A. On February 7, 2017, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea as a foreigner of the nationality of the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter “China”), and applied for refugee status on February 8, 2017 while staying there.

B. On February 24, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision on the recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff does not constitute “a well-founded fear that the Plaintiff would be subject to persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.

C. The Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on March 30, 2017, but the Plaintiff was dismissed on October 11, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion began with the Plaintiff’s participation in the Spacian conference from December 2002 until December 2015, and continued to conduct training in the plazas, attending a meeting for public relations, producing CDs, etc. In addition, the Plaintiff was arrested on the ground that the Plaintiff was arrested on the ground that he did not carry out the training in the police.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case made on a different premise is unlawful even though the plaintiff's status as a member of a religion or a specific social group constitutes a refugee suffering from persecution.

B. In order to be recognized as a refugee, a person who entered Korea under the same stuff as that of arrest or detention of a person who has been subject to punishment in China, and who returned to China, has a well-founded fear of persecution by the Chinese government, or related to the Rose of Sharon while staying in Korea.