logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.09.27 2015누68309
난민불인정결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea with a visa on October 8, 2013 (C-3) as a foreigner of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (hereinafter “Pakic Republic”), and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on November 6, 2013.

B. On September 24, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition of non-recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute a case of “a well-founded fear that she would be injured” as a requirement of refugee under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee”) and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (hereinafter “Refugee Protocol”).

C. On October 22, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice, but the said objection was dismissed on July 1, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff was born within the Tol character's house, but he received a three example from the new church in 2007 and moved to the new church.

On September 29, 2013, the Plaintiff was subject to violence with the threat that “the distribution of a leaflet for the purpose of assembly (ching) or the withdrawal of a scarcity from four persons with an influence of identity,” while distributing a leaflet for the purpose of assembly (hing) in front of the church, along with the denial and the private village.”

(hereinafter “instant threat case.” Therefore, the instant disposition, which did not recognize the Plaintiff as a refugee despite the possibility that the Plaintiff might be stuffed for religious reasons if it returned to Pakistan, is unlawful.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. (1) In full view of the provisions of Article 2 subparag. 1 and Article 18 of the Refugee Act, Article 1 of the Refugee Convention, and Article 1 of the Refugee Protocol, the Minister of Justice shall either race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group; or

arrow