난민불인정결정취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of a decision not to recognize refugee status;
A. The first application for refugee status was filed on October 10, 2014 on the ground that “The Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea with his/her own nationality B of the Republic of Chicago (C-3) and entered the Republic of Korea with his/her short-term visit (C-3) on a short-term basis, and on October 16, 2014, the Defendant filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on the ground that “The father of his/her father who believed that the person who died during the abortion was the Plaintiff may bullying by using his/her authority.”
② On July 20, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision to recognize the refugee status against the Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on December 14, 2015.
③ The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the decision on refugee non-recognition of refugee status by asserting that “The Plaintiff served as a pharmacist in Chicago, who was arrested by giving birth drugs to his/her natives, died of his/her friendship, was brought to a criminal trial, and his/her father who has a strong influence in Kamers entered the Republic of Korea.” However, on April 21, 2016, the said decision was dismissed (Seoul Administrative Court 2016Gudan1373), and the Plaintiff’s appeal (Seoul High Court 2016Nu44836) and the final appeal (Supreme Court 2017Du30818) were dismissed, and the said decision became final and conclusive on April 14, 2017.
B. On July 10, 2017, which was after the decision became final and conclusive, the Plaintiff filed an order for departure with the Plaintiff on July 10, 2017, and on August 4, 2017, the Plaintiff again filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on the ground that “The father of the father of the father who is the father of the father of the father who is the father of the French language right mobilized the soldiers in the French language and threatens the mother to find the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff is likely to be killed at the time of returning from the English language right.”
② On May 31, 2019, the Defendant rendered a final and conclusive judgment against the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff would be threatening to his father.