1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 9, 2005, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea as a foreigner of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (hereinafter “Skistan”), and the status of employment for training (E-8) was deleted on June 1, 2007, when the Enforcement Decree of the Immigration Control Act was amended by Presidential Decree No. 20076, Jun. 1, 2007;

On August 5, 2008, when the status of stay was changed to the status of non-professional employment (E-9), the applicant left the Republic of Korea on August 5, 2008. On October 4, 2008, when the applicant re-enters the Republic of Korea to the status of non-professional employment (E-9) and re-enters the period of stay, extended the period of stay, and was staying, on March 16, 2012, before the expiration of the period of stay

(hereinafter “instant refugee application”). B.

On December 20, 2013, the defendant rejected the refugee application of this case on the ground that the plaintiff does not constitute a case where there is a well-founded fear that the plaintiff would suffer persecution" as a requirement of refugee under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.

(See Evidence No. 1-1, hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”).

On December 26, 2013, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the instant disposition to the Minister of Justice, but the Minister of Justice dismissed it on June 27, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1-3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the chopatha, as a chopatha, from the origin of Punjb (Rowalindi) chopatha. The Plaintiff’s propatha is the Plaintiff’s propatha. The Plaintiff’s propatha is the Pakistan People’s Party (PP) (PP).

) On the other hand, the external side support the tetrac-A-Personnel (Pakist Thriq Insaf, hereinafter referred to as “PTPP”).

The plaintiff supported the PP supporter and the PTPP supporter in the village where the plaintiff was living.