1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The court's explanation concerning this case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where the third-party 13 to 20 of the judgment of the court of first instance is used as follows. Thus, the court's explanation as to this case is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The Plaintiff stated to the effect that “Amado 27 years old and became a same-sex child” was “Amado 27 years old and became a same-sex. However, even if an individual’s sexual identity is a significant change, the Plaintiff’s above statement is not sufficiently explained whether the body and reliability of body are considerably lacking, and even if such fact was found, the Plaintiff’s sexual identity can be deemed to have been actually changed. ② The Plaintiff sent to the refugee visitor on the ground that he was arrested to the police for more than one week and detained for more than one year on the ground that he was sexual intercourse. However, in light of the fact that the Plaintiff left the airport after having been issued a normal passport, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff was sexual intercourse even if he was the same-sex.”

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.