logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2019.08.29 2019구단9156
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 February 16, 2017, as a foreigner with the nationality of the Republic of Ra (hereinafter “Ra”) of the Republic of Ra, with the status of stay D-4 (general training).

B. On June 26, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for recognition of refugee status with the Defendant, but on August 28, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition for recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that it is difficult to recognize “the well-founded fear of persecution” as prescribed by 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. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition on September 14, 2018, and filed an objection with the Minister of Justice, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on the same ground as the Plaintiff’s objection on May 27, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1 to 3, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff suffered from old-gu disease around six to seven years of age, thereby suffering from vertebal disability.

It is highly likely that people who kill or kills persons with disabilities may be damaged by crimes.

In 209-2010, two male men who do not know of 2009 to 2010, the plaintiff was friendly to escape as it is fast as the plaintiff gets away.

In addition, on February 2012, the plaintiff was posted to 3 male men who do not know about the way that he returned to the house.

On the other hand, the plaintiff's external villages threatened the plaintiff with murdering while using the plaintiff as a product.

If the plaintiff returns to her home country, it is likely to be threatened with life or physical freedom on the ground that she is a disabled person.

Nevertheless, the plaintiff's refugee status is recognized.

arrow