logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2019.03.29 2018구단23308
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. The Plaintiff is a foreigner of the Republic of Korea nationality.

On May 20, 2017, the Plaintiff entered and stayed in the Republic of Korea as a short-term visit (C-3) sojourn status, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on July 3, 2017.

B. On September 18, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision to deny refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that there is a well-founded fear that the Plaintiff’s assertion would be subject to persecution as a requirement for refugee status under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee”) 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 October 23, 2017, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on September 3, 2018.

On October 2, 2018, the Plaintiff received a notice of dismissal decision of an objection.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s parent’s major point of the Plaintiff’s assertion was the Plaintiff’s husband’s entrance to the Senegalian school. However, the Plaintiff rejected the Plaintiff’s statement of the Plaintiff’s entrance to the said school, i.e., the Plaintiff would be an acute suslim.

As a result, the Plaintiff was threatened with murder and assault by his parents.

Therefore, even though there is a well-founded fear that the Plaintiff would suffer from persecution when she return to the Republic of Korea, the disposition of this case by the Defendant who did not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee should be revoked because it is unlawful.

B. In full view of the provisions of Article 1 and Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act, Article 1 of the Refugee Convention, and Article 1 of the Refugee Protocol, the Minister of Justice shall be adequate to be stuffed on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group or political opinion.

arrow