1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. In the course of disposition, the following facts: short-term sojourn status visit (C-3) on January 19, 2016 of the date of entry into the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea of the date of application for refugee status recognition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on January 22, 2016: (a) the date of application for refugee status recognition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) and the date of January 22, 2016 of the date of application for refugee status recognition; (b) there is no dispute over the grounds of recognition of the decision to dismiss the decision on December 7, 2017 as of the date of application for objection, with which there is no ground for recognition of the decision to dismiss the decision on December 13, 2017; (c) Party A’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, 1, and 2; and

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

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

Islamic school prohibits same-sexism.

However, the plaintiff was a same-sex, and thereby, he was threatened with his family and local residents.

If the plaintiff returned to the Republic of Korea, he/she should be recognized as a refugee because he/she could also be threatened.

B. Determination 1) Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act defines a refugee 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, due to such fear, cannot return to or does not want to return to the country in which he/she had resided before entering the Republic of Korea.” 2) In full view of the following circumstances revealed by adding the entire arguments to the arguments in Articles 4, 5, and 6, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff “a well-founded fear based on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion,” and since there is no other evidence to acknowledge this, the Plaintiff’s application for refugee status recognition was rejected.