logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.04.07 2017구단50204
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 July 4, 2011, the Plaintiff, who was a national of Bangladesh, entered the Republic of Korea with the status of non-professional employment (E-9) sojourn on July 4, 201, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on April 25, 2016.

B. On May 18, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision on the recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute a case of “a well-founded fear that would be subject to persecution” as a requirement of refugee under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees.

C. The Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on May 30, 2016, but the said objection was dismissed on the same ground as October 27, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3, 4, Eul 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's argument in Bangladesh, around 1988, designated Islamic school as a national of the Republic of Korea. At present, 83% of the citizens of Bangladesh believe Islamic school, and on the other hand, the hin school that the plaintiff believed is merely 16%.

The plaintiff was believed to believe that he had been sleeped from slock, and continued to be slock from slocks.

From around 2001, Muslim violence occurred frequently in the Plaintiff’s house and the Plaintiff’s family members desire to take the examination. From May 1, 2014, around 5, when the Plaintiff was staying in the Republic of Korea, 50-60 students of Muslim violence were not allowed to return land to the Plaintiff’s house and “hings,” and the Plaintiff’s family members were called the Plaintiff’s group.

In addition, on September 1, 2014, the Plaintiff returned to the Republic of Bangladesh, which was a large-scale religious event on September 1, 2014, and the Plaintiff and their families participated. The number of 150 slives were included, and the number of 60 to 70 slives including the Plaintiff and their families were included.

arrow