logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2020.04.08 2020구단1103
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 June 15, 2017, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Turkey as a foreigner of the nationality of the Republic of Turkey (hereinafter “Turkey”), and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on August 16, 2017, upon entering the Republic of Korea as a visa exemption (B-1) status.

B. On December 11, 2018, the Defendant rendered a decision on the recognition of refugee status on the ground that the “ sufficiently based fear that the Plaintiff would be subject to persecution” stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees cannot be recognized.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

The Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on February 7, 2019, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the objection on October 18, 2019.

【In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence 1 through 3, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff asserted in Turkey that the plaintiff established a school in the 1960s in Turkey, which is a well-known educator, Islamic sexualist, and ideologicalist of Turkey, and engaged in activities related to the community service activity.

However, the government of Turkey is under the influence of those who have engaged in activities related to B, considering the behind force of the military coupa, and detained the relevant persons.

The plaintiff is already arrested and detained by the government of Turkey as being related to B, and the plaintiff is also receiving several times from the government of Turkey.

Therefore, when the plaintiff returns to Turkey, it is likely to threaten the government's life or physical freedom.

Nevertheless, the defendant's disposition of this case which did not accept the plaintiff's application for refugee status should be revoked as it is unlawful.

B. The fact that an applicant for refugee status 1 has “contributedly-founded fears” on the grounds that the applicant is “a member of a specific social group,” such as race, religion, nationality, or political opinion.

arrow