logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 2018.11.08 2018누4785
난민불인정처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Details of disposition;

A. On December 24, 2015, the Plaintiff, a foreigner of the nationality of the Egypt Republic of Egypt (hereinafter “Egypt”), entered the Republic of Korea as the status of stay in the Tourist Department (B-2, the period of stay 30 days) and filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on March 18, 2016.

B. On March 2, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision on the recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff does not constitute a case of “a sufficiently-founded fear of persecution,” which is a requirement for refugee status under 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 and filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on March 20, 2017, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the relevant application on July 18, 2017.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1, 2, and 3, Eul 4 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is an employee of the Muslim terrorist group against the present president of Egypt, and the Plaintiff forced the Plaintiff to use violence and intimidation, and join the Muslim group. The Plaintiff is expected to force the Egypt to join the Egypt if he returns to the Egypt due to the occurrence of the Egypt.

Therefore, the instant disposition that did not recognize it on a different premise is unlawful, even though there is sufficient concern for gambling when returning home with Egypt.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

(c)Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act does not allow or want to be protected by a State of nationality due to well-founded fear of recognizing that a person may be disadvantaged on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a particular social group or political opinion.

arrow