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 23, 2008, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Pakistan for the first time on July 23, 2008, and visited Pakistan several times. On March 20, 2013, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea again on March 20, 2013, and filed an application for refugee status with the Defendant on May 23, 2013.

B. On February 21, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-recognition of refugee status on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute “a well-founded fear that would be prejudicial to persecution” as a requirement of refugee under Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol on the Status of Refugees.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

On March 11, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on March 11, 2014, but the said objection was dismissed on September 30, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 5 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion mainly played the role of helping the said political party to wage the election campaign as a sponsor of the PL- Q political party.

On March 15, 2013, the PMF- Q political party intended to hold seminars on the paths located in the Harbura area, and seven persons including the Plaintiff were prepared to do so. On the same day, at around 10:00, six persons including the Plaintiff were found to be in place and were in place, and then threatened the Plaintiff, etc. on the following grounds: (a) on the same day, at least 10:00, by saying that “The Plaintiff, etc. will hold seminars at any place or die in election campaign.”

In addition, the Pakistan continues to commit terrorism, and there is a risk due to it.

Therefore, the instant disposition made on a different premise is unlawful, since the Plaintiff’s return to Pakistan is likely to be harmful for the said reasons.

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

(c) provide that each entry in the evidence Nos. 3 through 8, which is known by adding to the whole purport of the pleadings, is as follows.