1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On February 15, 2015, the Plaintiff was a foreigner of the nationality of the Republic of Senegal, and arrived at the Incheon National Port of Korea.

B. The Plaintiff was subject to the disposition of non-permission of entry from the Defendant and transferred a new disease to the waiting room for repatriation on the grounds that the purpose of entry is unclear, and the Plaintiff filed an application for refugee status by asserting that he/she would feel a threat due to religious gambling in the waiting room for repatriation.

C. On March 3, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision not to return refugee status screening (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “The Plaintiff’s assertion does not correspond to a well-founded fear for booming, but is apparent to abuse an application for refugee status screening as a means for domestic entry. Therefore, it constitutes a ground for determining not to return refugee status screening under Article 5(1)3 and 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the Refugee Act.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 7, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. 1) Party’s assertion 1) Although the Plaintiff’s application for refugee status does not clearly fall under cases where it is not clearly well-grounded, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition, and thus, the instant disposition was in violation of law that deviates from or abused the discretion of the Defendant on the Defendant’s decision to refer to refugee examination. In addition, the Defendant did not deliver a written disposition at the time of the instant disposition, and there is procedural error that does not present the grounds and reasons for the disposition. Therefore, the instant disposition should be revoked on the above grounds. 2) The Defendant’s assertion that there is somewhat little dispute among Islamic species in

Even though there was no report on the degree of serious conflict with the refugee, the refugee application was filed by concealing the fact that he/she was under threat of life after manipulating the "homicide case" on August 2013, 2013, and then concealing the fact that he/she was under threat of life. As such, the Plaintiff’s refugee application is governed by Article 5(1)3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Refugee Act.