1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the lower court’s acceptance of the judgment of the first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for adding the following judgments, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiff asserts that there is a well-founded fear that there is a sufficient ground for persecution in Pakistan, a country of nationality, inasmuch as it is clear that the plaintiff would be subject to violence, intimidation, etc. from the suslim that new finites of Islamic teaching in the case of return to Pakistan.

However, in light of the above-mentioned’s religious policy, judicial system, and public order, the specific contents and nature of the Plaintiff’s argument, the Plaintiff’s entry route, the period from entry into and departure from the Republic of Korea to the application for refugee status, and the circumstances of the application for refugee status, etc., there is insufficient evidence to deem that there exists a sufficient fear of being detrimental to the Plaintiff’s religious or social persecution, as well as the Plaintiff’s statement

Meanwhile, according to the data submitted by the Plaintiff, it can be known that there are people visiting the Mestan and terrorist incidents against the Mestan also have been reported several times, but it is not enough to regard it as a general social phenomenon.

Plaintiff’s assertion

Even according to its own, the Plaintiff does not correspond to the Plaintiff’s leader, etc. who gives a speech and behavior to the extent of attention to the general public.

It is difficult to readily conclude that the Plaintiff is unable to receive a minimum protective order from the authorities if the Plaintiff returned to Pakistan only on the basis of concerns over internal resistance.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is not accepted.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.