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 May 25, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on April 25, 2016, while entering and staying in the Republic of Korea on a short-term visit (C-3) on April 26, 2016, as a foreigner of the nationality of the Republic of Austria (hereinafter “ASEAN”).

B. On October 26, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision on the recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff cannot be recognized as “ sufficiently-founded fears that would be subject to persecution” as a requirement for refugee status under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.

C. On November 11, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on November 11, 2016, but the decision dismissing the Plaintiff’s application was rendered on April 21, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the disposition

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff joined an organization claiming the separation and independence of the Republic of ASEAN, and the Government Armed Forces is at risk of being threatened by the Government on the grounds that the government Armed Forces witnessed the scene where he/she was acting in the Republic of ASEAN, and that he/she was acting in the said organization.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case that did not recognize the plaintiff as a refugee is unlawful even though the possibility that the plaintiff would be stuffed due to the above circumstances is high in case the plaintiff returned to Austria.

B. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by adding up the above facts of recognition and the purport of the evidence No. 3 and the entire pleadings, it is insufficient to deem that the Plaintiff has a sufficiently-founded fear of persecution, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

The defendant's disposition of this case is legitimate.

1 The plaintiff joins a non-Afra organization for the independence of non-Afra and takes the lead in addition to attending a meeting.