logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2019.10.16 2019구단11685
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 May 23, 2017, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea with a short-term visit (C-3) status on May 23, 2017, and applied for refugee recognition to the Defendant on August 2, 2017.

B. On October 31, 2018, the Defendant rendered a decision on the recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff cannot be deemed as having “a sufficiently-founded fear of persecution” as stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.

C. The Plaintiff appealed to the Minister of Justice on November 26, 2018, but was dismissed on April 10, 2019.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Entry B in Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Although the grounds for applying for refugee status do not specifically appear in the summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion, it is written in the complaint to the effect that the application for refugee status is filed on the same grounds as the Plaintiff alleged in the procedures for refugee status screening, the Plaintiff’s assertion was arranged based on the Plaintiff’s statement at the time of the Plaintiff’

The plaintiff has been a school system since her wife was married with his wife, and the plaintiff's smaller tendency as remuneration has been found and demanded the plaintiff's identification and hedging, and made intimidation.

However, despite such opposition, the Plaintiff was married with the Plaintiff’s wife, and thereby was threatened by hearing the Plaintiff’s desire or being abused from the smaller baby, saliva, and surrounding relatives of the Plaintiff wife.

Therefore, inasmuch as there exists a well-founded fear that the Plaintiff would be subject to gambling when he returns to the Republic of Bangladesh, the instant disposition that the Plaintiff did not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee on a different premise is unlawful.

B. Determination 1 “Refugee” refers to race, religion, nationality, and specific.

arrow