'Ex-Husband Assault' Tunisian Woman's Refugee Application Rejected... Supreme Court "Subject to Review"

[Financial News] The Supreme Court has ruled that the decision by the Immigration Office to reject the refugee application of a Tunisian woman, who claimed she did not receive adequate protection from her country's police despite continuous assaults by her ex-husband, is unjust.
According to the legal community on the 30th, the Supreme Court's 2nd Division (Chief Justice Oh Kyung-mi) overturned the original ruling that dismissed the plaintiff's case in a lawsuit filed by a Tunisian national, Ms. A, against the Incheon Airport Immigration Office's decision not to refer her refugee recognition examination, and sent the case back to the Seoul High Court.
Ms. A entered Türkiye on a medical visa in August 2023 and stayed there until she entered Korea in November of the same year. The Incheon Airport Immigration Office guided Ms. A to the entry review room, citing unclear entry purposes.
Subsequently, Ms. A applied for refugee status, stating, "I was continuously and severely assaulted by my ex-husband in Tunisia, divorced, and even after the divorce, I continued to suffer assaults and threats, but did not receive adequate protection from the Tunisian police."
However, the Immigration Office did not refer her for refugee recognition examination, claiming that she was from a safe country with no possibility of persecution or that her application was clearly without reason, such as applying for economic reasons.
Ms. A filed a lawsuit in protest, and the lower courts' judgments were divided. The first trial sided with Ms. A, stating that it cannot be conclusively said that her refugee recognition application was clearly without reason. On the other hand, the second trial judged the Immigration Office's decision as lawful.
The second trial court pointed out, "The harassment by the ex-husband, which Ms. A claims as the reason for her refugee recognition application, is a private matter and should be addressed by requesting protection from the national authorities of her home country." It also considered the possibility that Ms. A came to Korea for economic reasons.
However, the Supreme Court overturned this judgment, stating, "It cannot be said that the refugee recognition application is clearly without reason, and furthermore, the burden of proof for the application being clearly without reason lies with the defendant."
The Supreme Court presented criteria under the Refugee Act Enforcement Decree, stating that to satisfy the condition of coming from a 'safe country,' the refugee applicant must be guaranteed re-entry to the countries they passed through before arriving at a Korean port of entry, receive a fair and substantial refugee recognition examination and have the opportunity to appeal in those countries, and if they meet the refugee requirements, be recognized as a refugee with status and treatment corresponding to international standards.
Regarding 'cases where the refugee recognition application is clearly without reason,' it stated, "There must be serious contradictions in the claims regarding major facts, or it must be evident to the extent that the reason for the refugee recognition application is clearly revealed to be without reason due to being significantly inconsistent with objective data," and "If the reason for the claim cannot be revealed without accurately investigating the facts, it cannot be said that the refugee recognition application is clearly without reason."
Furthermore, it stated, "It is difficult to find objective data to the extent that there is a serious contradiction in the plaintiff's claim that she suffered continuous violence and harassment from her ex-husband and could not expect sufficient protection from the Tunisian authorities, or that it is clearly evident from the records that this cannot be believed."

jisseo@fnnews.com Seo Min-ji Reporter