(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.03.29 2016구단66264

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.03.29 2016구단66264

난민불인정결정취소

Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea on a short-term visit (C-3) on December 4, 2011, and applied for refugee recognition to the Defendant on October 16, 2015.

B. On October 28, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-recognition of refugee status on the ground that the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have a well-founded fear that the Plaintiff would suffer from persecution as stipulated in 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. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on December 7, 2015, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on March 23, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, and purport of the whole pleadings

2. In full view of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s application for recognition of refugee status filed by the Plaintiff on August 22, 2016 at the latest, upon examining whether the lawsuit is lawful; (b) the Plaintiff was aware of the fact that the application for recognition of refugee status was finally dismissed through an objection filed by the Minister of Justice on August 22, 2016; and (c) the instant lawsuit is apparent in the record that it was filed on December 20, 2016 after the lapse of 90 days thereafter; and (d) thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it fails to observe the period for filing the lawsuit

In this regard, the plaintiff asserts that the lawsuit in this case is lawful on the grounds that the plaintiff failed to comply with the time limit for filing a lawsuit due to the failure to obtain the Korean language, and therefore, the lawsuit in this case should be deemed lawful on the grounds that there is a subsequent completion of the lawsuit. In addition, Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, which applies mutatis mutandis to the administrative litigation, provides that if the parties are unable to comply with the peremptory term due to the grounds that are not attributable to them, the litigation may be supplemented within two weeks from the

참조조문

-민사소송법 제173조 제1항

-행정소송법 제20조 제1항

유사 판례

-서울행정법원 2017.03.22 2016구단65179

-서울행정법원 2017.05.24 2017구단53050

-서울행정법원 2017.04.19 2016구단33769

-서울행정법원 2017.11.29 2017구단28214