logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.05.30 2017누86486
난민불인정결정취소
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. The reasons for the admitting this case by the court of first instance are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the submission of some contents as stated in the following Paragraph 2. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The second to fourth to seventh of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be written in the following manner:

1) The term “b. Determination 1” means “any act causing serious infringement or discrimination on essential human dignity, including threats to life, body or freedom,” which is a requirement for recognition of refugee status. A foreigner applying for recognition of refugee status must prove that there is “a good-founded fear” subject to such persecution (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Du14378, Apr. 25, 2013). Considering the unique circumstances of a foreigner, the foreigner cannot require the relevant foreigner to prove the entire alleged facts based on objective evidence, and is consistent and persuasive in his/her statement, and is consistent and persuasive; the course of entry, the period from entry to the refugee application, the background of the application for refugee status, the situation of the country of nationality, the degree of fear of the applicant’s residence, the political, social and cultural environment of the region where the applicant resides, the degree of fear of fear that the ordinary person feel in the region’s region had to recognize the facts based on the credibility of his/her overall statement in light of the following circumstances.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Du3930 Decided July 24, 2008, etc.). On the other hand, when the sexual orientation or sexual identity of same-sex is disclosed externally, it can be faced with criticism and criticism against the moral norm of the country of origin against family members, neighbors, and the public, which would be against social criticism, in order to avoid such social reputation, inequality, and value.

arrow