1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, a national of the People's Republic of China (Peopna, hereinafter "China"), entered the Republic of Korea on October 24, 2006, and entered the Republic of Korea again on December 4, 2009, as E-9 (Non-Specialized Employment) sojourn status, and continued to obtain permission for extension of the period of sojourn on a yearly basis, even after the expiration of the period of sojourn on December 3, 2012, the Plaintiff continued to obtain permission for extension of the period of sojourn in the Republic of Korea.

B. On June 28, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for recognition of refugee status with the Defendant, but on July 6, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition for recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that it is difficult to recognize “the well-founded fear that there is a risk of persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Convention”) and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Protocol”) and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Protocol”).

C. On August 12, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice against the instant disposition. However, the Minister of Justice dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on the same ground as on December 7, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 3, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion began to conduct the Plaintiff’s training of the company-level in around 2005, and the Chinese government pressures the training of the company-level, and while the Plaintiff stays in the Republic of Korea, the company was arrested and tried in the Chinese Government on the ground of the training of the company-level, and was sentenced to imprisonment for about three and a half years and six months.

The plaintiff also visited China around July 2012, when visiting Dok-si, it is possible to find China's official proposal in his house and to find it in his office.