The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 28, 2017, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Turkey as a foreigner of the nationality of the Republic of Turkey (hereinafter “Turkey”), and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on December 15, 2017, upon entering the Republic of Korea as a visa exemption (B-1) status.

B. On January 22, 2019, the Defendant rendered a decision on the refusal of refugee status on the ground that the “ sufficiently based fears that the Plaintiff would be subject to persecution” stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees cannot be recognized.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute over the grounds for recognition”, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was a Islamic Sari Simology, and was married to Turkey, a country of nationality.

The plaintiff was forced from the family members of the Eherpha-son's spouse to take part in the species, and the family members of the spouse began to threaten the plaintiff as the plaintiff refused to take part in the species.

The plaintiff was suffering from the spouse's her spouse's fluorcy and was taking the action in question.

Therefore, even if the Plaintiff’s return to Turkey is likely to pose a threat to his/her life or physical freedom, the Defendant’s disposition rejecting the Plaintiff’s application for recognition of refugee status should be revoked as it is unlawful.

B. Determination 1) The fact that an applicant for refugee status has “abruptly-founded fear” on the grounds of “a person’s race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a specific social group, or political opinion” ought to be attested by the refugee applicant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Du14378, Apr. 25, 2013). In this context, in light of the special circumstances of the refugee, the applicant cannot require the relevant foreigner to prove the entire alleged facts based on objective evidence, but at least to be recognized as a refugee.