1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 10, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on February 21, 2017 while entering the Republic of Korea as a short-term visit (C-3) sojourn status and staying there on a short-term basis.

B. On February 27, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision of non-recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff cannot be recognized “ sufficiently based fears that would be detrimental to persecution” as prescribed by Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.

C. On March 27, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on March 27, 2017, but rendered a final decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s application on June 8, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the disposition

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was as follows: (a) around 2001, the Plaintiff joined a political party B according to his father, who is the father of the Party B, and organized election activities; (b) on that basis, the Plaintiff was threatened by the members of the Party APC (APC) in various elections from around 2012 to around 2015.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case that did not recognize the plaintiff as a refugee is unlawful even though the possibility that the plaintiff would be stuffed due to the above circumstances is high in case the plaintiff returned to Austria.

B. In full view of the following circumstances, it is insufficient to view that there is a well-founded fear of persecution to the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

The defendant's disposition of this case is legitimate.

1 The Plaintiff applied for recognition of refugee status to the Defendant on the ground that it had already been threatened with Bococon before the application for recognition of refugee status was made, but received a disposition of non-recognition on May 1, 2014.