logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2014.10.16 2014구합10585
난민불인정결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 30, 2005, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea as a foreigner of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (hereinafter “Skistan”), and the status of employment for training (E-8) was deleted on June 1, 2007 by the Enforcement Decree of the Immigration Control Act amended by Presidential Decree No. 20076, Jun. 1, 2007;

On October 18, 201, 201, when staying in the status of non-professional employment (E-9), the Defendant applied for refugee recognition on October 18, 201, four days before the expiration of the period of stay.

(hereinafter “instant refugee application”). B.

On November 1, 2013, the defendant rejected the refugee application of this case on the ground that the plaintiff does not constitute a case where there is a well-founded fear that the plaintiff would suffer persecution" as a requirement of refugee under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.

(See Evidence No. 1-1, hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”).

On December 9, 2013, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the instant disposition to the Minister of Justice, but the Minister of Justice dismissed it on April 11, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 1-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is the Raj, punjb, Punab, Paisala (Faisala) origin, which is the Racscam (Raj) scam.

On September 2, 2010, at around 19:30 on September 2, 2010, the Plaintiff was threatened with the Plaintiff’s murdering of the Plaintiff, if he did not prepare 5 million rush within 15 days from 3 people who sawd the shower of Hoho, who could not identify him in the vicinity of the Market.

Therefore, when the plaintiff returned to Pakistan, the disposition of this case was taken on a different premise, even though there was a well-founded fear of persecution from the above leader.

arrow