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.

1. The grounds for the court’s explanation concerning this case are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance (excluding the part pertaining to “3. conclusion”) except for the modification of the pertinent part of the judgment of the first instance as follows 2. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. As modified, “C” and “B” are added to the right side of “C” and “B” below the two pages.

The following shall be added to the right side of the “illegal” of 5 parallel below:

【On the other hand, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that even if this court does not regard the Plaintiff as a refugee, it is necessary to permit the Plaintiff to sojourn humanitarianly, but it is not allowed under the Administrative Litigation Act to seek the performance of an administrative disposition against the Defendant, who is an administrative agency. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s above assertion cannot be accepted without further review.

(3) 6 pages 6 of the 3rd page shall add the following:

Therefore, in order for the Plaintiff to be recognized as a refugee, a person who has a well-founded fear of persecution from the Republic of Korea in the event of having entered the Republic of Korea under the same stuff as that of arrest or detention in relation to the Plaintiff’s participation in a demonstration organized by an organization pursuing independence in South Korea, which is subject to punishment in the Republic of Korea, or who has a well-founded fear of persecution from the Republic of Korea to the point of view of the government of the Republic of Korea in relation to the separation of South and North Korea while staying in Korea, or who has a sufficiently-founded fear of persecution from the Republic of Korea to the point of view of the government of the Republic of Korea in relation to the separation of the South and North Korea (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Du14378, Apr. 25, 2013). Meanwhile, when evaluating the statement of the refugee applicant, the details of the statement are somewhat inconsistent or partly exaggerated.