1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The issues of the instant case and the judgment of the court of first instance

A. On November 10, 2015, the Plaintiff, the key issue of the instant case, applied for refugee status to the Defendant, but the Defendant, on January 11, 2016, issued a disposition not to grant refugee status recognition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff cannot be recognized as the grounds for “not being able to be protected by the country of nationality due to fear of sufficient grounds to recognize that he/she could be injured,” as stipulated under Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act.

The key issue of this case is whether the Plaintiff is a refugee under Article 2 (1) of the Refugee Act.

B. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court of first instance based on the evidence of this case, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff has a well-founded fear of persecution on the ground of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion. There is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently, and thus, the disposition of this case which the Plaintiff did not accept the Plaintiff’s application for refugee status is lawful.

① Even in consideration of the special nature of refugee recognition cases, there is no objective evidence supporting the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff was threatened by intimidation other than the Plaintiff’s statement.

② In light of the fact that the Plaintiff first entered the Republic of Korea on a short-term visit (C-3) on December 8, 2010 and applied for refugee status on November 10, 2015 while continuing to stay after the expiration of the above status of stay on December 23, 2010, the Plaintiff is doubtful whether the Plaintiff applied for refugee status for the purpose of avoiding persecution on the ground of race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a specific social group or political opinion.

③ Even if there is a risk of gambling alleged by the Plaintiff, it is difficult to find out data that the Pakistan government is unable to provide sufficient judicial protection.