1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff entered Korea on July 12, 2013, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on August 6, 2013, after having entered Korea.

On January 10, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition to deny refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have “a well-founded fear of persecution” (see Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act).

The Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on February 3, 2014, but was dismissed on June 27, 2014.

[Based on recognition, the Plaintiff asserted the legitimacy of the instant disposition and the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 1, 2, and 1, and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings, and visited the family members of the business from around 2005, who were residing in the mentornam City (Tiz).

In 2009, political parties belonging to Islamic Reformion Party demanded the plaintiff's family members to leave the business on the ground that the plaintiff's family members grow confidential information of Islamic Reformion Party.

When the plaintiff's family members refuse to do so, the political party members belonging to Islamic Reformion Party killed the plaintiff's punishment, and the rest of the plaintiff's family members were missing.

The Islamic Reformion Party is a cluster party in the people's world, and if the plaintiff returns to mentor, there is a risk of persecution from the Islamic Reformion Party.

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

In order to be recognized as a “refugee” under Article 2 subparag. 1 of the former Refugee Act, the requirement that the applicant for refugee status has a well-founded fear of persecution in his/her country is required, and that the relevant persecution was made on the ground of “human race, religion, ethnicity, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.”

The reason for the plaintiff's argument is that the plaintiff's family members were the spath of Islamic Reformary Party, which is the party in his mentment.

In other words,