1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea on March 5, 2014, with the nationality of the Republic of Mameron (hereinafter “Mameron”) and the status of stay C-3 (short-term visit) of the Republic of Mameron (hereinafter “Mameron”).

B. On March 6, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for recognition of refugee status with the Defendant, but the Defendant, on March 13, 2017, issued a disposition for recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that it is difficult to recognize “the well-founded fear that there is a risk of persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Convention”) and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Protocol”) and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Protocol”).

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition on June 2, 2017, and filed an objection with the Minister of Justice. However, the Minister of Justice dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on the same ground on March 21, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1 to 3, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that, around 2012, the supply of electricity to the area where the Plaintiff was living was suspended several weeks, the Plaintiff participated in the demonstration before the electrical company.

At the time, the police officers who participated in the demonstration arrested majority of the persons who participated in the demonstration, and the plaintiffs were arrested at that time and were subject to criminal trials.

The plaintiff, while being escorted to the court, escaped by taking firearms, and later became the Republic of Korea through Magria and Thailand, etc.

In Canada, English residents are discriminated against in comparison with French residents, and the plaintiff is also a resident of English use area, so if he/she returns to his/her own country, he/she is likely to be sentenced to death penalty by severe discrimination in criminal trial process.

Nevertheless, there is a need to do so.