1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of disposition;

A. On December 20, 2014, the Plaintiff, a foreigner of the nationality of the Republic of India (hereinafter referred to as “ India”), entered the Republic of Korea and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on January 19, 2015.

B. On November 20, 2015, the Defendant issued a notification of refugee status refusal (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that it does not constitute a case where there is a well-founded fear, which is 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. The Plaintiff appealed and raised an objection to the Minister of Justice, but was dismissed on March 23, 2016.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff, who is working as a party B in India's assertion, was threatened by harassment or attack from C party members while participating in the demonstration, and C party members found the plaintiff's house and found the plaintiff and act as a threatening speech and behavior to escape to the Republic of Korea. Thus, there is sufficient concern about the possibility of gambling when returning to Korea through India, and it is a reasonable fear. However, the disposition of this case which did not recognize it on a different premise is unlawful.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff has “a well-founded fear of persecution on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion,” even if all evidence and arguments submitted by the Plaintiff were considered, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

① An interview is conducted on the content, degree, frequency, and possibility of future gambling that the Plaintiff received.