1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

On January 15, 2016, the Plaintiff, as a man of the nationality of the Republic of Egypt (hereinafter referred to as “Egypt”), submitted an application for refugee recognition to the Defendant on the same day on the same day after arrival at the Incheon State supply port.

(hereinafter “instant application”). On January 22, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision not to refer to the refugee status screening (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that: (a) the Defendant: (b) rendered a decision not to refer to the refugee status screening (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff falls under cases where there is no clear reason for the application for refugee status, such as where the Plaintiff had been in a safe country with no possibility of gambling, or that the applicant wishes to obtain refugee status solely for economic reasons; and (c) there is no reason to refer the application for refugee status

【Ground of recognition” without any dispute, entry in the evidence Nos. 1, 3, 6, and 9, and the purport of the entire pleadings, as to the disposition of this case where the procedural illegality of the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the lawfulness of the disposition of this case is applied to the disposition of this case. As such, when the Defendant takes the disposition of this case, it shall be made in writing and the Plaintiff shall be presented the grounds and reasons therefor (Articles 23 and 24 of the Administrative Procedures Act). The Defendant did not properly explain the grounds for disposition to the Plaintiff while rendering the disposition

The defendant's decision to refuse to refer refugee status review may violate Article 33 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter "Refugee") which provides for the prohibition of forced repatriation of refugees by refusing refugee status without a fair refugee status review. Thus, in order for not to violate the Refugee Convention, Article 5 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Refugee Act to be strictly interpreted in cases where the possibility of refugee status recognition is not clearly evident.

The plaintiff is likely to be an honorary deceased person in Egypt and does not fall under Article 5 (1) 4 or 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the Refugee Act, but the defendant tried to review the status of the plaintiff.