From the Jeppesen ILS plate for R11 at Trabzon (LTCG/TZX), the ILS CAT I Decision Heights (i.e. heights being referenced to 'above the ground', i.e. being referenced in the same manner as the reported cloud base):
2.5% go-around gradient = 496 ft decision 'height '.
3.5% go-around gradient = 436 ft decision 'height '.
4.5% go-around gradient = 386 ft decision 'height '.
For a B737 it's likely (read that as 'sensible') that one should be using the most limiting go-around gradient (i.e. 2.5%) the assumption being that you get an engine failure at the moment you press the TOGA button, that is unless your landing analysis data shows that you can get a better gradient than that, i.e. having suffered and engine failure at or in the go-around?!
From that weather (METAR reported above) you can read:
At time 20:20z broken cloud 300 ft height above the ground.
At time 20:50z broken cloud 400 ft height above the ground.
Some might of course retort that BKN (Broken cloud) is not a 'ceiling'. However, if the bit of sky that you're in is also the bit with the BKN cloud in it (and remembering that BKN = over half the sky) well go figure the view out of the window?!
So what's revealed by the above reported METAR is, whilst the visibility (which is the controlling parameter for commencing an approach) wasn't limiting, the cloud-base was sitting lower than the published ILS CAT I minima, coupled with a glide-slope that is steeper than normal (the ILS on R11 at TZX is set at 3.3º), as well as a slightly misty visibility and light rain... well let's just say that there are a number of gotcha's with that scenario !