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 February 6, 2014, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea with tourism Tong (B-2) status on February 6, 2014, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on June 30, 2014.

B. On May 13, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision to recognize refugee status (hereinafter the instant disposition) 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 Relating to the Status of Refugees.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap 3, Eul 1, Eul 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was unlawful as the Defendant’s disposition that did not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee even though it was highly likely that the Plaintiff would be stuffed if he/she would return to Egypt, since the Plaintiff worked as a slick-type member from 2011 to 2013.

(b) The definitions of terms used in this Act shall be as follows:

1. The term "refugee" means a foreigner who is unable or does not want to be protected from the country of his/her nationality due to well-founded fear that he/she may be injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a specific social group, or political opinion, or a stateless foreigner who, owing to such fear, is unable or does not want to return to the country in which he/she resided before entering the Republic of Korea (hereinafter referred to as "state of his/her nationality");

C. According to the written evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the Plaintiff, as a general member of the Muslim management body, did not engage in any activity that would have received the attention of Egypt authorities, and in fact did not have any threat, and there is little possibility that Egypt government’s attention and prejudice the Plaintiff.

Therefore, it cannot be viewed that there are sufficient grounds for the fear that the plaintiff feel.

3...