Detail View

The World Economic Forum (WEF) selected “Large-Scale Involuntary Migration” as one of the world's top 10 global risks in 2018. This is because forced migrants, who are leaving their country due to war, civil war, religious disputes, and terrorism are increasing. As of 2019, about 71 million people around the world were noted as asylum seekers, and about 26 million of them received refugee status. The international community has created several refugee agreements to accept and protect refugees and mandates the protection of refugees/asylum seekers who enter and stay in recipient countries. Korea also accepts refugees as a member of the Refugee Convention. According to the Ministry of Justice, the number of refugee applicants has steadily increased, with 16,176 applying in 2018. In the future, the number of refugee applicants in Korea will increase further. If so, how are we responding to refugee inflows in the country? Since a few years ago, the refugee problem has become a hot issue due to the influx of Yemen, Afghanistan, and Myanmar refugees into Korea. So, this paper focused on refugee issues. In addition, a perception survey was conducted on students and graduates in their 20s and 30s of International Studies or GSIS. The survey was conducted in a sequential mixed method, and after the survey, several applicants were selected and interviewed. First of all, the survey subjects showed a high understanding of the refugee and refugee agreements, but it was not highly understood the domestic refugee law and social security system. Secondly, it was examined refugee perception based on economic, social, humanitarian, international, multicultural, criminal and security, and religious factors. The result is that the positive level of refugee perception was higher than that of negative because the refugees who were simply exposed by the media did not directly affect the respondents' life and the respondents think refugees should be respected for their human rights. However, when asked about the influx of refugees into the country, the agreement rate and the disagreement rate were almost the same, largely because the influx of refugees could affect their life. In addition, it was mentioned that it is necessary to actively participate in accepting refugees to maintain the state's status in a similar position to other developed countries. However, on the other hand, the economic burden and social confusion were a barrier to the refugee influx. Finally, it was confirmed that news related to refugees reported in the media also affects respondents' perceptions of refugees. In conclusion, our society is already developing into a multicultural society. Since 2010, refugee applications have been steadily increasing, and now it is very important to escape discrimination, exclusion, and exclusive consciousness. So we must discuss accepting refugees as members of our society and preventing social conflicts in advance. Furthermore, it is time to recognize that the refugee issue has become a national task for social integration as a member of the Korean social community beyond simply the human rights protection approach, and requires an attitude of embrace and acceptance.

Table of Contents
Ⅰ. Introduction ··············································································1
1.1 Background of Refugees ····························································1
a. Definition of Refugees······························································1
b. Status of Refugees ··································································2
1.2 Research Objectives and Questions ···············································5
1.3 Significance of Research ····························································6
a. 2030 Agenda and the World Refugee Convention······························6
b. Identify Social Conflict and Present Solutions··································7
Ⅱ. Literature Review ······································································9
Ⅲ. Research Framework································································12
3.1 Positive Perception Framework ···················································12
a. Multiculturalism ····································································12
b. Economic Profit Theory···························································13
c. Rousseau's Compassion ···························································13
3.2 Negative Perception Framework··················································14
a. Intergroup Threat Theory··························································14
b. Ethnocentrism·······································································15
c. Indirect Victimization Model ·····················································15
Ⅳ. Methodology···········································································17
4.1 Method Approach ···································································17
4.2 Selection of Procedure······························································18
4.3 Explanation of Procedure ··························································18
Ⅴ. Results ···················································································20
5.1 Personal Information································································20
5.2 Awareness of Refugees ·····························································22
a. Refugee Act and Comprehension for Refugee Act Targets ·················22
b. Refugee Policy Comprehension··················································24
5.3 Perception of Refugees ·····························································28
5.3.1 Recognition of Refugees Itself··················································28
5.3.2 Perceptions of Refugees' Domestic Inflow····································29
5.3.3 Factors in the Perceptions of Refugees' Domestic Inflow ··················31
a. The Results of Level of Agreement··············································31
b. Top-Level of Agreement ··························································32
c. Large Gap Between Agreement Rate Within One Factor·····················35
d. Bottom-Level of Agreement······················································41
5.3.4 Survey Summary··································································44
5.4 Solution···············································································45
Ⅵ. Implications ···········································································47
6.1 National Level: Social Integration Policy ·······································47
6.2 Social Level: Stop Covering Fake Frames on Refugees·······················47
6.3 Individual Level: Attitude of Acceptance and Coexistence ···················48
Ⅶ. Conclusion ············································································50
Reference····················································································53
Appendices ·················································································60
Appendix 1. Survey Questionnaire (English)·····································60 
Appendix 2. Original Survey Questionnaire (Korean) ·························69