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 August 7, 2016, the Plaintiff, as a foreigner of the nationality of the Republic of India (hereinafter “ India”), entered the Republic of Korea as a short-term visit (C-3) sojourn status, and applied for refugee status recognition to the Defendant on November 7, 2016 (hereinafter “instant application”).

B. On December 26, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision on the recognition of refugee status on the ground that the “ sufficiently based fear that the Plaintiff would be subject to persecution” stipulated in Article 1 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees and Article 1 of the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees cannot be recognized.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

The Plaintiff filed an objection with the Minister of Justice on January 18, 2018, but the Minister of Justice dismissed the objection on February 14, 2019.

【In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence 1 through 3, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted in India, who is a nationality country, married with a female of the higher carst group than the Plaintiff. Due to the above marriage, the Plaintiff was threatened with murder from his wife’s family by being subject to assault from the Defendant’s wife.

If the plaintiff returns to India, it is likely to be threatened with life or physical freedom.

Nevertheless, the disposition of this case which rejected the Plaintiff’s application for refugee status should be revoked as it is unlawful.

B. Determination 1) The fact that an applicant for refugee status has “abruptly-founded fear” on the grounds of “a person’s race, religion, nationality, status as a member of a specific social group, or political opinion” ought to be attested by the refugee applicant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Du14378, Apr. 25, 2013). In this context, in light of the special circumstances of the refugee, the applicant cannot require the relevant foreigner to prove the entire alleged facts based on objective evidence, but at least to be recognized as a refugee.