1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. During the process of the disposition, the following facts are: (a) the Tourism Register on September 10, 2015 (B-2) the date of entry into the Republic of Korea of the U.S. on September 10, 2015 (hereinafter “instant disposition”); (b) the date of application for refugee status recognition (hereinafter “instant disposition”); and (c) November 12, 2015 of the date of application for refugee status recognition; (d) there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition of the rejection of the decision of the decision of the Supreme Court on December 10, 2015 as of the date of application for objection that there is no ground for recognition of the rejection of the decision of the decision of the Supreme Court on October 27, 2016; and (e) the purport of the entire arguments and the entire arguments.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is a national of the Egypt Republic of Egypt (hereinafter "Egypt").

The plaintiff is Muslim. In Egypt, the plaintiff was slicker with a woman who is a slicker in Egypt, which caused violence from the female's family members and thereby was threatened with murder.

The Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea after leaving the damaged Egypt.

As such, since the Plaintiff’s return to Egypt is likely to be detrimental to gambling, the Plaintiff ought to be recognized as a refugee.

B. Determination 1) Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act defines a refugee as “a foreigner who is unable to be protected or does not want to be protected by the country of nationality due to a well-founded fear to recognize that he/she may be injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion, or a foreigner who does not want to be protected, or who, due to such fear, cannot return to or does not want to return to the country in which he/she had resided before entering the Republic of Korea.” 2) In full view of the following circumstances revealed through the overall purport of the arguments, when comprehensively considering the evidence as seen earlier, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have “a well-founded fear of persecution on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion,” and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this.