logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.04.17 2017구단79663
난민불인정결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 21, 2005, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea with the visa exemption (B-1) status on January 21, 2005, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on August 17, 2016.

B. On December 1, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision on refugee status refusal (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute a case of “a well-founded fear of persecution,” as prescribed by the requirements for refugee status under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Convention”) and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Protocol”).

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on January 10, 2017, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on July 18, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is a chronology, and the country of nationality of the plaintiff is the state of Islamic religion, 83% of the people believe Islamic religion, and there are frequent terrorism against minority religion, such as chronology.

In fact, the Plaintiff was subject to violence and intimidation on the ground that he was not a church from about six tampers, among those who completed a ceremony of a week around January 2, 2005 in the country of nationality and returned to the house, and when the Plaintiff returned to the country of nationality, the disposition of this case which did not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee is unlawful, despite the risk of persecution from unscambling for religious reasons as above, if the Plaintiff returned to the country of nationality.

B. In full view of the provisions of Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act, Article 1 of the Refugee Convention, and Article 1 of the Refugee Protocol, it is due to a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.

arrow