logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.12.18 2015구단16569
난민불인정결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 11, 2013, the Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea with a short-term visit (C-3) sojourn status on October 22, 2013, and applied for refugee status to the Defendant on October 22, 2013.

B. On September 1, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-recognition of refugee status (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not constitute a case of “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 Relating to the Status of Refugees.

C. On September 29, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on September 29, 2014, but the said objection was dismissed on September 24, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is Magbo as Magro-bomi (Uudioi) origin from Magro-Magro-Mabio (Immbo).

The plaintiff resided in Abaos for job-seeking from around 1986 to March 1993 and from around 1994 to around 1998, and returned home at the Gobathy expense around 198.

The Plaintiff had a traditional religion called Ajala in the high village. However, the believers of the traditional religion demanded that the Plaintiff succeed to the president around 2002. However, the Plaintiff rejected this.

Traditional Religious believers threatened the Plaintiff from March 2013 to 2013, and arrested the Plaintiff’s children around March 2013. On June 2013, 2013, they completed the church services and died, threatening the Plaintiff who returned to the house with their knife and died.

On August 8, 2013, the plaintiff's house was frightened by the plaintiff's house and the escape was also inflicted upon the plaintiff with a knife.

Therefore, the Plaintiff.

arrow