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 16, 2015, the Plaintiff, a national of the Democratic Republic of the Netherlands (hereinafter referred to as “NE”), filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on May 14, 2015, when entering the Republic of Korea for a short-term employment (C-4) status and staying there, and before the expiration of the period of stay ( May 17, 2015).

B. On June 16, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision to deny refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff does not constitute a case where there is a well-founded fear that would be detrimental to a person’s status” as a 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] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 1 and Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion, as the supporter for the Nepalilis Party from four arms, was engaged in supporting activities, such as singing and promoting the four arms conference by participating in the events hosted by the four arms conference, but was subjected to intimidation from SJM (Syukta Jti Muti Mucha), which is the organization of the other party.

At around May 2014, SJM’s members threatened the Plaintiff by telephone that “the Plaintiff supports the four-party conference or does not engage in singing for the four-party conference,” and then threatened the Plaintiff to find the Plaintiff’s house and to “the Plaintiff’s house if he supports the four-party conference.”

Therefore, although the plaintiff was born to the Republic of Korea, the above assistant staff continues to threaten the plaintiff's family members by stating that "if the plaintiff returned to the four arms, frighten and leg will be cut back, and all family members will kill."

Therefore, the Plaintiff constitutes a refugee who is likely to suffer violence, intimidation, or pain due to political opinion.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did so.