1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

(a) Plaintiff’s entry into the Republic of Korea and refugee application - Plaintiff’s nationality: Hau group - Entry and refugee application: April 6, 2013 (Status of Sojourn: C-3) / Application for refugee status on September 24, 2014

B. The Defendant’s decision not to recognize refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) - Grounds for not recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”): No sufficiently-founded fear of fear that is likely to be harmful to gambling may be recognized.

(c) Plaintiff’s filing of an objection and decision of dismissal - Decision of dismissal: The fact that no dispute exists on May 31, 2016 [based on recognition], Gap’s entries in subparagraphs 1, 2, 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion should be recognized as a refugee since he/she resided in the Haria border area in the Haria and suffered damage due to the storm.

B. Determination 1) Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act provides that “Refugee” means a foreigner who is unable or does not want to be protected by the country of nationality due to a well-founded fear to recognize that he/she may be injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a specific social group, or political opinion, or a stateless foreigner who is unable or does not want to return to the country in which he/she had resided before entering the Republic of Korea due to such fear.” 2) In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence as seen earlier, when comprehensively considering the following circumstances, 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 specific social group, or political opinion,” and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise, the disposition of this case, which rejected the Plaintiff’s application for recognition of refugee status, is legitimate.

① The Plaintiff was temporarily staying in the Republic of Korea on seven occasions in the past for a motor vehicle trade business, and entered the Republic of Korea on a short-term visit (C-3) on April 6, 2013, and on July 2013, 2013.