1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff is a Ga or a foreigner of nationality.

On June 29, 2015, the Plaintiff applied for refugee status to the Defendant.

On November 17, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision not to recognize refugee status on the ground that “a well-founded fear of persecution” against the Plaintiff is not recognized.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Gap’s evidence No. 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff's return to the country of nationality is likely to threaten the third village in which the plaintiff and the plaintiff's return to the country of nationality are enclosed with the third village and its subsequent persons. Thus, the disposition of this case is unlawful.

B. The term “refugee” refers to a foreigner who is unable or does not want to be protected by the country of nationality due to well-founded fear to recognize that he/she may be injured on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a particular social group, or political opinion, or a stateless foreigner who, owing to such fear, is unable to return to, or does not want to return to, the country in which he/she resided before entering the Republic of Korea.

(No. 1) Article 2 Subparag. 1 of the Refugee Act, which is the requirement for recognition of refugee status, refers to “any act causing serious infringement or discrimination on essential human dignity, including threats to life, body, or freedom,” and the fact that there is a “comfortable fear” subject to such persecution should be attested by a foreigner who files an application for recognition of refugee status.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Du14269, Mar. 10, 2016). There is no evidence to deem that there is a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a specific social group or political opinion when the Plaintiff returned to a country of nationality.

Rather, if the evidence Nos. 1 to 4 reveals the purport of the whole argument, A or the Constitution guarantees the freedom of movement within its country.