logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.08.21 2015구단2249
난민불인정결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 5, 2013, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea with a short-term visit (C-3 and 90 days of stay) as a foreigner with the nationality of the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “the Republic of Korea”), and filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on August 30, 2013.

B. On February 19, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff does not constitute a case of “a sufficiently-founded fear that the Plaintiff would be subject to persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on March 27, 2014, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the said objection on December 16, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was persecutiond by the Government on February 27, 2013, by attending a large-scale total strike and assembly led by the Party, which was arrested on the basis of the support of the Rotte Democratic Force Federation (UNDG) (hereinafter “UFDG”).

In the event that the Plaintiff returned to his home country, despite the risk of persecution for such political reasons as above, the Defendant’s disposition of this case on a different premise is unlawful.

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

C. Taking into account all the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff and the circumstances alleged in this court, even if considering the entirety of all the evidence presented by the Plaintiff and the circumstances revealed in this court, it is insufficient to recognize the Plaintiff as having “sufficiently based fear of persecution,” which is the requirement for recognition of refugee status, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it as a refugee.

arrow