1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The details of the disposition are as follows: short-term stay visit (C-3) on October 11, 2016 of the date of entry into the Republic of Korea of the Plaintiff’s Nationality date; short-term refugee status application (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on December 21, 2016 (hereinafter “instant disposition”); the fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition of the decision of rejection of the decision of March 21, 2018 of the date of application for objection that there is no sufficient ground for recognition of refugee non-recognition: The fact that there is no ground for recognition of the decision of rejection of the decision of March 21, 2018 of the date of application for objection; Gap’s evidence 1 through 4; Eul’s evidence 1 and 2; the purport of the entire pleadings; and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a national of the Republic of Kenya (hereinafter “Kenya”).

In around 2014, the Plaintiff was proposed to join the said organization from a member of the “B,” which is an armed violence organization, but refused to do so.

Since then, the plaintiff has been in the Republic of Korea regardless of Kenya because it will be killed from the side B.

If the plaintiff returns back to Kenya, he/she should be recognized as a refugee because he/she is in danger of murder from B.

B. Determination 1) Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act defines refugee status as “a foreigner who is unable to be protected or does not want to be protected by the country of nationality due to well-founded fear to recognize that he/she may be injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion, or a foreigner who does not want to be protected, or who does not have to return to the country in which he/she had resided before entering the Republic of Korea due to such fear.” 2) In full view of the aforementioned evidence and the evidence in subparagraph 3 as well as the following circumstances revealed in the statement in subparagraph 3: (a) it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff “a well-founded fear of being injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion,” and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.