logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.12.18 2015구단10684
난민불인정결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 9, 2007, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Pakistan (C-2) as a foreigner of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (hereinafter referred to as “Pakic Republic”), and changed the status of stay to a business investment (D-8) on October 23, 2007, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on September 7, 2012 while staying there.

B. On March 18, 2014, 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. On April 17, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an objection, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the said objection on April 2, 2015. However, in consideration of humanitarian aspects, the Minister of Justice decided the Plaintiff as “human resident” pursuant to Article 2 subparag. 3 of the Refugee Act.

[Ground of recognition] Class A evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s families, who were the Plaintiff’s assertion sludge, were threatened by the families of their home countries and the Pakistan shotos located in the Republic of Korea on the grounds that they were married to the Republic of Korea during their stay in Korea.

When the Plaintiff returned to his home country, the instant disposition that did not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee despite the risk of persecution for religious reasons is unlawful.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. (1) In full view of the provisions of Article 2 subparag. 3 and Article 76-2(1) of the former Immigration Control Act (amended by Act No. 11298, Feb. 10, 2012), Article 1 of the Refugee Convention, and Article 1 of the Refugee Protocol, the determination is based on race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion.

arrow