1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 6, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on June 14, 2016 while entering the Republic of Korea as a foreigner with the nationality of Kazakhstan (B-1) sojourn status and staying in the Republic of Korea.

B. On August 26, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition not recognizing the Plaintiff as a refugee (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute “a sufficiently-founded fear of persecution” as stipulated in the Refugee Act and the Convention on the Status of Refugees.

C. On September 21, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on September 21, 2016, but rendered a final decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s application on April 21, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the disposition

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) there was a dispute arising in the course of running the business in Kazakhstan; and (b) the Plaintiff was threatened by the obligees.

Therefore, the Defendant’s disposition that did not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee is unlawful despite high possibility that the Plaintiff might be stuffed due to the above circumstances when the Plaintiff returned to Kazakhstan.

B. In order to be recognized as a refugee, in addition to the requirement that the applicant for refugee status has a well-founded fear of persecution in his or her country, the applicant has been made on the ground of “a person’s race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a particular social group or political opinion”.

The reason for the persecution alleged by the Plaintiff is that “the Plaintiff was threatened by the obligees because it was impossible for the Plaintiff to repay its debts,” and even if all of the Plaintiff’s allegations are acknowledged, this is a private threat so long as there is no evidence to deem that the Kazakhistan Government implied or neglected an act of persecution by a private person for the same reason.