beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. In the course of the disposition, the following facts: (a) the tourism channel of Sep. 9, 2015 (B-2) the date of entry into the Republic of Korea of the U.S. on Sept. 9, 2015; (b) the date of application for refugee status recognition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) and the date of application for refugee status recognition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on Sept. 30, 2016; (b) the reason for refugee status non-recognition: (c) the decision of Jan. 13, 2017; (d) there is no dispute that there is no ground for recognition of the decision of rejection of the decision of Mar. 3, 2017 as of the date of application for objection; (d) the entry in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 1, and 2, and the purport of
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion is a national of the Egypt Republic of Egypt (hereinafter "Egypt").
Since the 125 Revolution, the plaintiff has been involved in the KIKO Pak-gu campaign opened at Mangym University, and due to that, the plaintiff was arrested and detained by Egypt police and was assaulted.
As such, if the Plaintiff returned to Egypt, it should be recognized as a refugee, because it is likely that the police would be stuffed.
B. Determination 1) Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act defines refugee status as “a foreigner who is unable to be protected or does not want to be protected by the country of nationality due to well-founded fear to recognize that he/she may be injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion, or a foreigner who does not want to be protected, or who does not have to return to the country in which he/she had resided before entering the Republic of Korea due to such fear.” 2) In full view of the aforementioned evidence and the evidence in subparagraph 3 as well as the following circumstances revealed in the statement in subparagraph 3: (a) it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff “a well-founded fear of being injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion,” and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.