1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. During the disposition, the following facts are: (a) the Plaintiff’s nationality Kazakhistan Republic of Korea entry date of December 5, 2015; (b) the visa exemption application (B-1) refugee status exemption (hereinafter “instant disposition”) of the date of application for refugee status recognition on May 19, 2016; (b) the reason for refugee non-recognition recognition of refugee status which was decided on September 19, 2016 by the decision of September 19, 2016; (c) there is no ground for rejection of the decision of the decision of the decision of February 24, 2017 as of the date of application for objection; (d) there is no ground for rejection of the decision of the decision of the decision of February 24, 2017; and (e) the entry in subparagraphs 1, 2

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a national of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter “Kazakhstan”).

The plaintiff operated the store in Kazakhstan.

However, local inferior players demanded the Plaintiff to pay money, and the Plaintiff rejected it, thereby threatening the Plaintiff.

The plaintiff has been in the Republic of Korea regardless of the harm khovastan as above.

As such, the Plaintiff should be recognized as a refugee because it is likely to threaten the Plaintiff’s return to Kazakhstan.

B. Determination 1) Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act defines refugee status as “a foreigner who is unable to be protected or does not want to be protected by the country of nationality due to well-founded fear to recognize that he/she may be injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion, or a foreigner who is not a national who, due to such fear, is unable to return to or does not want to return to the country of nationality before entering the Republic of Korea.” 2) The foregoing evidence and the statement in the evidence No. 3 reveal the following circumstances that can be known by adding the whole arguments to the purport of the pleading in addition to the statement in the evidence No. 3, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff has “a well-founded fear of being injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, or political opinion.”