logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.11.09 2017구단72617
난민불인정결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On April 9, 2013, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of ASEAN (hereinafter referred to as “Naria”) as a foreigner of nationality, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on May 21, 2013, after entering the Republic of ASEAN as a short-term visit (C-3) sojourn status.

On April 29, 2014, the Defendant filed an objection against the defect of the decision not to recognize refugee status. Upon dismissal of the objection, the Defendant filed a lawsuit to revoke the decision not to recognize refugee status by the court 2015Gudan851, but was sentenced to a judgment against the Plaintiff on September 17, 2015.

After that, the Seoul High Court appealed 2015Nu60435, but was dismissed on April 21, 2016, and the Supreme Court appealed 2016Du39962, but was dismissed on September 9, 2016.

On December 14, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on December 14, 2016. On January 12, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition for refugee status refusal (hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute “a well-founded fear that would be persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter referred to as “Refugee”) and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (hereinafter referred to as “Refugee Protocol”).

On January 18, 2017, the Plaintiff received a notice of decision on non-recognition of refugee status and filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on February 10, 2017, but was dismissed on the same ground as of April 21, 2017.

The Plaintiff received a written notice of rejection of the objection on July 10, 2017.

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

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was from around 2012 to March 2013, the Plaintiff served as a self-sagle from Lagles, and on March 25, 2013, arrested one terrorist on the new wall and transferred it to the police.

The terrorists were released after long time, and the assistants of the organization to which the person belongs were frightened by the plaintiff.

arrow