1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

On July 28, 2016, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea with tourism Tong (B-2) status on July 28, 2016, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on August 16, 2016.

On September 27, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-approval of the Plaintiff’s application for refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute “a well-founded fear of persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Refugee Convention and Article 1 of the Refugee Protocol.

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on October 24, 2016, but the said objection was dismissed on April 21, 2017.

【In the absence of any dispute, the Plaintiff’s husband supported the former president, supported by the Muslim type B, which was supported by the Muslim group, as to whether the disposition of this case was legitimate or not, as a whole, written evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire argument.

around June 2013, the husband participated in the demonstration at least 15 times after the beginning of the president's own financial power, and was arrested at the police around June 2014 and January 2016.

In February 2016, the plaintiff and her husband moved to a different area with her family members, but the police visited her husband's relatives and visited her husband's wife to find out her husband's whereabouts.

In addition, the husband of the plaintiff was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months because he was unable to repay his obligation due to the obstruction of the police's business.

For this reason, the plaintiff's husband's return to his own country is highly likely to be harmful to gambling.

Therefore, the instant disposition that did not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee according to the family-combined principle is unlawful.

Judgment

In full view of the provisions of Article 2 subparagraph 1 and Article 18 of the Refugee Act, Article 1 of the Refugee Convention, and Article 1 of the Refugee Protocol, it is due to a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group or political opinion.