logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2019.11.28 2019구단15168
난민불인정결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea on April 9, 2019, as foreigners of the nationality of the Russian Feder (hereinafter “Russian”) of the Russian Federation (hereinafter “Russian”), with the status of stay B-1 (Visa exemption).

B. On June 5, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant, but on July 10, 2019, the Defendant rendered a disposition for refugee status refusal (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that it is difficult to recognize “the well-founded fear that there is a possibility of persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Convention”) and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Protocol”) and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Protocol”).

C. On September 23, 2019, the Plaintiff appealed to the instant disposition and filed the instant lawsuit.

(A) The plaintiff did not raise an objection to the Minister of Justice). 3. [Grounds for recognition] The plaintiff did not dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff is satisfied with Kygyz Republic (hereinafter “Kygygyz”) from the Kygygyz Republic, and thereafter, the Plaintiff acquired the Russian nationality by moving to Russia.

In around 2015 and 2016, the Plaintiff stated that B was a “multistan” person in the refugee interview investigation.

It seems that the term "Mastan" refers to the Republic of Mastan, which is the Self-Governing Republic of Mastan, located in the Western coast of the damage caused by the car.

From 70,000, used cars were purchased in 70,000, and first 35,000,000,000,000 were paid to B, and the remaining 35,000,000,00,000.

However, the plaintiff came to know that the automobile is stolen in the course of registering the automobile, and it has already been done to B.

arrow