logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.10.16 2015구단10103
난민불인정결정취소
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff A is well-known

On April 26, 2012, an alien with the nationality of the Republic of Korea (hereinafter referred to as “C-3”) entered the Republic of Korea as a short-term visit (C-3) sojourn status and stayed, and filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on June 18, 2012, which was prior to the expiration of the period of sojourn ( July 25, 2012).

B. On April 9, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant Disposition 1”) on the ground that the Plaintiff does not constitute a case where there is a well-founded fear that the Plaintiff 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 Relating to the Status of Refugees.

C. The plaintiff B is well-known.

A national foreigner entered the Republic of Korea with a short-term visit (C-3) sojourn status on August 31, 2013 and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on September 30, 2013, the expiration date of the period of stay ( September 7, 2013).

On June 17, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant Disposition 2”) on the ground that the Plaintiff does not constitute a case where there is a well-founded fear that the Plaintiff would suffer persecution” as a requirement of refugee under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2-2, Gap evidence 2-1, 2-2, Eul evidence 1-1, 2-2, Eul evidence 2-1, 2-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether a disposition No. 1 of this case is lawful

A. The plaintiff A's assertion that the plaintiff A is well-known.

On February 18, 2011, as a member of the Democratic Reforming Pream Co., Ltd., participated in the election of the President and member of the National Assembly. At the time, three members of the Blak Mamba were discovered and reported, and three members of the Blak Mamb were arrested by assaulting the said Plaintiff and jointly with the police.

경찰은 위 원고를 카웸페 경찰서에...

arrow