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. The Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea on April 5, 2015 with a short-term visit (C-3) status as a foreigner of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (hereinafter “Pakic Republic”), and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on April 9, 2015.
B. On April 20, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-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 Relating to the Status of Refugees.
C. The Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on June 1, 2015, but the said objection was dismissed on September 24, 2015.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The plaintiff's assertion is the plaintiff's claim that Punjb Punja, Gujakwala, which is a part of the Hashmi of the village in Myanmar.
On November 17, 2013, the Plaintiff entered the National Assembly of the Union comprised of nine villages with recommendation of 2,000 village visitors, and 2 village visitors, who oppose the Plaintiff’s appearance, shall not participate in the election of the Plaintiff, shall not participate in the election of the Plaintiff, and shall require the Plaintiff to not participate in the fighting between the race and the race, and the Plaintiff’s friendship and one feass died, and one feass of the Plaintiff’s friendship was injured.
Since then, while the plaintiff went to 2, the plaintiff was able to hear the words that people have scambling the plaintiff, and tried to escape again to the Republic of Korea.
Therefore, in the event that the plaintiff returns to Pakistan, there is a concern that the plaintiff might be stuffed from the opposing party on the grounds that the plaintiff goes out to the election of the Vice-Chairperson of the Union.