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 is a foreigner of Austrian nationality.

On September 23, 2017, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea with a short-term visit (C-3) sojourn status on a short-term basis, and applied for refugee recognition to the Defendant on October 12, 2017.

B. On October 30, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision to deny refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion would be subject to 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”) on the ground that there is a well-founded fear that it would be subject to persecution as a requirement for refugee status.

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on December 14, 2017, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on September 3, 2018.

On September 28, 2018, the Plaintiff received a notice of dismissal decision of an objection.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is Ziniaian Ear (Ibo) Earian Aar (IbO).

On March 2016, the Plaintiff subscribed to B, an organization supporting the independence of the Bafra (Biafra) at the distance of the Mana-si in the Mana-si.

Since then, the plaintiff became a codinter in the Uima region in B, and played an important role in informing the members of the group whenever a meeting is held, and most of the participants participated in the demonstration for the Uima independence.

In order to find out the B members of the area where the plaintiff had resided, the Austrian government assigned the government group to find out the B members of the area where the plaintiff had resided, and found the plaintiff who is a coditer.

In fact, it was confirmed that the name of the plaintiff was written on the list of the clerk B and codivists kept in the police station.

Therefore, if the plaintiff returns to Austria, B is in charge of the position.