1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The details of the disposition are as follows: (a) the tourism channel of sojourn status on November 13, 2017 (B-2, 30 days) and the application for refugee status recognition (B-2, 30 days) on November 22, 2017 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on September 6, 2018 of the date of application for refugee status recognition; (b) there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition of refugee status status refusal: (c) there is no ground for recognition of the decision to dismiss the application on October 19, 2018 as of the date of application for objection that the notification of refugee status is not possible; (d) there is no ground for recognition of the decision to dismiss the application on July 30, 2019 as of the date of decision of October 19, 2018; and (e) the entries in subparagraphs 1 through 3, 2

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is likely to be sentenced to a sentence on the ground that the plaintiff failed to perform his/her guaranteed obligation when he/she returned to Egypt.

Nevertheless, the instant disposition that did not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee is unlawful.

B. (1) In full view of the provisions of Article 2 subparag. 1 and Article 18 of the Refugee Act, Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees, and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees, the Minister of Justice must recognize a foreigner in the Republic of Korea who is unable or does not want the protection of the country of his nationality due to well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, as a refugee.

“persecution” which is a requirement for refugee status refers to “any act causing serious infringement of, or discrimination against, essential human dignity, including threats to life, body, or freedom.” A foreigner who files an application for refugee status must prove that there is a “a sufficient-founded fear of fear.”

In light of the following circumstances that can be seen by comprehensively taking into account the Doshel Doshel, Eul’s entry in No. 3 and the overall purport of the pleadings, the type, religion, nationality, and nationality of the Plaintiff, even if considering all the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff and all the circumstances alleged by the Plaintiff.