1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 24, 2015, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Pakistan as a foreigner of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (hereinafter referred to as “Pakic Republic”), and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on July 9, 2015, by entering the Republic of Korea as a short-term visit sojourn status.

B. On June 8, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision on the recognition of refugee status on the ground that Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees cannot be recognized as a “ sufficiently-founded fear of persecution” as a requirement of refugee.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

The Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on June 22, 2017, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the objection on June 12, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1, 2, 3, 8, Eul's 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a senior to a senior to a senior to a senior to a senior who has grown in the territory of Pakistan, and Pakistan adopts Islamicus as a national bridge, the Islamic believers forms an absolute majority of the population, and there is an atmosphere that discriminates against senior to a senior to a senior to a senior to a senior to a society in the entire Islamic society.

During that period, the Plaintiff’s South East East (B; hereinafter “Dong”) had been stuffed from Islamic believerss on the ground that he worked in the Islamic Germany organization. From May 2013 and July 2014, Islamic believers demanded the Plaintiff to change his name into Islamic bridge and to change the name of the Plaintiff into Islamic school, and threatened the Plaintiff to kill the Plaintiff unless the Plaintiff is opened.

In addition, the plaintiff himself has also actively engaged in social activities as a senior dyslexist.

Considering such various circumstances, if the Plaintiff returned to Pakistan, it should be deemed that there is a well-founded fear of persecution on the ground that the Plaintiff was a person with shotology.

The plaintiff is recognized as a refugee.