(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.06.09 2016구단10582

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.06.09 2016구단10582

난민불인정처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of disposition;

A. On June 27, 2010, the Plaintiff, a foreigner of Vietnam, entered the Republic of Korea for a short term (C-3) visa on June 27, 2010 and completed the stay. 2010

7. On October 1, 2015, when staying in excess of seven (7) and applied for refugee status to the Defendant.

B. On October 22, 2015, the Defendant issued a notification of refugee status refusal (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that it does not constitute a case where there is a well-founded fear that is a requirement for refugee status under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 3, the purport of whole pleading

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In the Plaintiff’s assertion Vietnam, the Plaintiff’s employees died while driving the Plaintiff’s three employees. As such, there may be concerns over threatening the Plaintiff’s return to Vietnam because the bereaved family and the bereaved family have not been resolved as a matter of compensation. Thus, the instant disposition that did not recognize the status of a refugee is unlawful.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff may be deemed to abuse the refugee recognition system for the purpose of extending the period of stay, in light of the fact that the Plaintiff entered the short-term visa and illegally staying in the country even after the expiration of the period of stay.

In addition, the plaintiff's assertion that there is a risk of threat from the bereaved family members of the victim in relation to traffic accidents seems to be able to solve the problem by requesting the protection of the government of its country.

Ultimately, there is no illegality in the disposition of this case that did not recognize the plaintiff as a refugee.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2016.06.09 2016구단10551

-광주지방법원 2016.06.30 2016구단10612

-광주지방법원 2016.06.09 2016구단10506

-광주지방법원 2016.06.15 2016구단10575

-광주지방법원 2016.11.17 2016구단684