1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 27, 2015, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of South Africa (B-2) with the status of stay in the tourism route (B-2) and applied for refugee recognition to the Defendant on December 7, 2015.

B. On February 18, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition to recognize 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. The Plaintiff appealed to the Minister of Justice on March 2, 2016, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on December 22, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff was born in the original Pakistan on September 15, 2015, and that the Plaintiff was forced to resign from and operate the property from the steering staff of the Stakistan mine located in the remaining Pakistan on September 15, 2015.

The plaintiff reported the fact of damage to the remaining public police and some of the assistance staff were arrested, but the assistance staff have contributed to the plaintiff's death and are threatening to kill the plaintiff.

Therefore, in the event that the Plaintiff returned to the Republic of Korea, there is a risk of persecution, and the instant disposition, which did not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee, should be deemed unlawful.

B. 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, a State of nationality cannot be protected due to a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.