beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. In the course of the disposition, the facts that there is no dispute as to the rejection of the decision made on September 14, 2018 of the date of the application for refugee status recognition (D-4, 6 months) of the date of entry into the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea of Turkey on September 5, 2016 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) and the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole, all of the entries in the evidence and evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 1, and 2, as of the date of the application for refugee status recognition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on December 15, 2016:
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion is likely to threaten the plaintiff's return to Turkey because it entered into the Islamic Republic of Korea.
In order to avoid such a threat, the instant disposition that did not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee in spite of the application for recognition of refugee status was unlawful.
B. (1) In full view of the provisions of Article 2 subparag. 1 and Article 18 of the Refugee Act, Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees, and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees, the Minister of Justice must recognize a foreigner in the Republic of Korea who is unable or does not want the protection of the country of his nationality due to well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, as a refugee.
“persecution” which is a requirement for refugee status refers to “any act causing serious infringement of, or discrimination against, essential human dignity, including threats to life, body, or freedom.” A foreigner who files an application for refugee status must prove that there is a “a sufficient-founded fear of fear.”
The plaintiff was submitted in light of the following circumstances, which can be seen by comprehensively taking into account the Doshel Doshe and the respective descriptions of the evidence Nos. 3, 5, and 7 (including paper numbers) and the overall purport of the pleadings: