1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is that the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition of the following Paragraph 2, and thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act

2. The plaintiff asserts that in the trial of the party, the plaintiff and his family members received a large amount of money from the four arms by suffering from mast, and that there is a situation where the plaintiff would be at risk of kidnapping or killing if they return to the four arms, and therefore, there is a fear that the plaintiff would have sufficient grounds for suffering from persecution, and that the plaintiff should be recognized as a refugee because it is difficult for the plaintiff to avoid persecution even if the plaintiff settled in the other area of the four arms, such as the Carbus.

However, in full view of the circumstances of the four arms recognized by the evidence admitted by the first instance court as seen earlier, and the political composition, relevant international reports, the Plaintiff’s entry route, the period from entry into the Republic of Korea to the application for refugee status, the background of the application for refugee status, and the criminal records before and after the application for refugee status, there is no sufficient fear to deem that the Plaintiff is likely to be injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or religious opinion.

In addition, even if considering the special circumstances of refugees, in this case, there is a lack of objective data to support the Plaintiff’s assertion, and it is difficult to believe the Plaintiff’s assertion as it is, since the circumstances leading up to the Plaintiff’s application for refugee status have not been delayed until the period of stay expires.

Even if the plaintiff or his family is threatened with the threat of her contribution from marinas due to the circumstances alleged by the plaintiff, it is difficult to view it as an stuffing act on the ground of the plaintiff's political opinion, and the plaintiff or his family cannot be protected by her Korean nationality.