beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Details of disposition;
A. The Plaintiffs, as married couple, were foreigners of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (hereinafter referred to as “VE”), and Plaintiff B entered the Republic of Vietnam (D-4) as visa on December 23, 2002, and were illegally staying in Korea after the expiration of the period of stay on March 7, 2004, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on October 19, 2015. Plaintiff A entered the Republic of Korea on August 20, 2006 with general visa on August 20, 2006, and illegally staying in Korea after the expiration of the period of stay on September 19, 2015, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on October 19, 2015.
B. On October 26, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision on the recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiffs do not constitute a case of “a well-founded fear that would be subject to persecution” as a requirement of refugee under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiffs' assertion that they were admitted to the Republic of Korea, and thus, they could not return to Vietnam because they could be threatened by the Buddhist believers of Vietnam when they return to Vietnam. Thus, the disposition of this case which did not recognize refugee status is unlawful.
(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;
C. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged in the statement No. 2 of the evidence No. 2, it is difficult to view the Plaintiffs as “sufficient fear of persecution on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion,” and there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise, and thus, it cannot be deemed that there was an error in the disposition of this case, which did not recognize the Plaintiffs as a refugee.
(1) The Plaintiffs were staying illegally for a long period after entering the Republic of Korea.