1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The circumstances leading up to the decision of non-recognition of refugee status ① The Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea on a short-term visit (C-3) on December 28, 2017 as a second student of the nationality of Pakistan, and applied for refugee status on January 3, 2018 for refugee status on the ground that “the Plaintiff forced the Defendant to capture money from the persons suspected of having been involved in the seizure at the seat of the shipping company office where the Plaintiff was working, and forced the Defendant to resign from money.”

② On November 12, 2018, the Defendant rendered a decision not to grant refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that “In view of the fact that the Plaintiff continued to reside in the ancient direction without being specifically threatened for not less than two years after kidnapping, it is difficult to deem that it is not likely that it would have a high possibility of persecution by particularly paying attention to the Plaintiff, and in light of the efforts of the Pacific government that seeks to pathum, it is difficult to deem that there is no possibility of protection of its government, and that the relocation to other regions within its country that does not have influence may be sufficiently considered” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

③ Although the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice, the Minister of Justice dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on July 30, 2019.

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

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Islamic political organization, a Islamic political organization, organized in the south of the Republic of Pakistan, is currently maintaining its name in the border area with the Pakistan, and thus, is subject to fear to the citizens of Pakistan.

At around September 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) during work at shipping company around 2015, the Plaintiff was kidnapped to four staff members of the lelebal team who saw the lebitis at home; (b) received assault; (c) sought a stop saw; and (d) paid USD 4,500 following the following day by intimidation to demand money; and (d) received intimidation from one person who appears to be an organization of the lebal team at the place of the company near the company around September 2017.

The plaintiff is retaliationed.