logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.01.29 2015구단15405
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 July 15, 2009, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea on July 15, 2009 as a non-professional employment (E-9) foreigner of the nationality of Bangladesh, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on May 9, 2014.

B. On September 24, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff cannot be deemed as having “a well-founded fear that the Plaintiff would suffer from persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee”) and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Protocol”).

C. On October 21, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice, but the said objection was dismissed on July 1, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion, around 2007, took part in the student organization of the Korean People’s Republic of Bangladesh (hereinafter “BNP”), and visited the Bangladesh while staying in the Republic of Korea, and on February 24, 2013, the Plaintiff participated in the BNP assembly in the Louaj market of the Louari Marina, which was the opposite party (hereinafter “AL”), and went into conflict with the support parties of the Amarri (hereinafter “Lariagle value”).

In the process of the Plaintiff’s damage to neighboring stores and houses, and upon the report of the AL Supporting Persons, the Plaintiff received the police’s multiple times, and entered the Republic of Korea after departure from Korea on March 2013.

If the plaintiff returned to Bangladesh, the disposition of this case which did not recognize the plaintiff as a refugee is unlawful despite the possibility of persecution such as being arrested by the police.

(b) Attached Form of relevant statutes;

C. (1) In full view of the provisions of Article 2 Subparag. 1 and Article 18 of the Refugee Act, Article 1 of the Refugee Convention, and Article 1 of the Refugee Protocol, race, religion, nationality, and nationality;

arrow