logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.10.27 2016구단24864
난민불인정결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff is a Pakistan-based foreigner.

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

On February 16, 2016, 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”). 【No dispute exists, Gap’s evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion is against the disposition of this case, since it is likely to threaten the "Sim-Amba", a Islamic armed organization, as a Islamic saba, as a Islamic saba.

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 6 (including paper numbers) shows the overall purport of the pleadings, it is the law that discriminates against the Pacifica in Pakistan.

arrow