1509735 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a protection visa. The applicant, a divorced woman from South Korea, claimed she feared persecution upon return to her home country due to her experiences of domestic violence and a general distrust of men and Korean society. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant faced a well-founded fear of persecution or was otherwise entitled to complementary protection in Australia.

The central legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) by having a well-founded fear of persecution, or alternatively, whether she qualified for complementary protection under section 36(2)(aa) due to substantial grounds for believing there was a real risk of significant harm upon removal from Australia. This involved assessing the applicant's claims of fear based on her experiences and the general country conditions in South Korea, as well as considering the definition of "significant harm" and the availability of effective protection measures.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the protection visa. It found that the applicant did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. While acknowledging the applicant's experience of domestic violence and her stated fear of Korean society, the Tribunal concluded that these fears did not meet the threshold for persecution under the Act. Specifically, the Tribunal did not consider the applicant to be a member of a particular social group in a way that would attract protection, nor did it find substantial grounds to believe she would suffer significant harm upon return to South Korea, noting that general societal issues or personal circumstances, without more, did not equate to a real risk of persecution or significant harm. The Tribunal also noted that no request was made for Ministerial Intervention.