Is it valuable to present a paper at an international conference?
I've got a fairly pessimistic view of the value of publishing in obscure, questionable places.  As an admissions committee member, I periodically see applicants with papers in journals or conferences I've never heard of.  Without more information, publishing in an unknown venue is completely meaningless, since the world is full of junk venues that will publish literally anything.  Many of them claim to do peer review and enforce scholarly standards, but they will actually accept nonsense text.  Unfortunately, there are no magic words (like "peer review" or "international") that will certify a publishing venue, because some venues simply lie, while others are honest but incompetent.

When I run across a completely unfamiliar venue listed in a graduate school application, I do some quick web searches to try to find out more about it.  Sometime I discover that I should have known about it, or that it's a perfectly reasonable and respectable venue that just doesn't have much of an international reputation, but often it looks pretty suspicious to me.  In those cases, I have one of two reactions, depending on how the application comes across.  Either I think "Oh no, this applicant was tricked into publishing a possibly worthwhile paper in a worthless journal", or I think "Hey, this applicant is publishing in a worthless journal to try to manipulate the system".  The former is more likely, with the latter being mainly when the application contains unseemly self-promotion or exaggerations.  Being tricked is mildly negative, since it suggests the applicant was naive and insufficiently careful, but it's not such a terrible thing.  (The main outcome would be that the paper counts for little or nothing.)  Being manipulative is very bad.

If you can't evaluate a conference yourself, it's important to seek advice from people who can, since sending good work to a bad venue is not a winning strategy.  As for MISG-2015, I can't speak from any direct knowledge, but the list of topics strikes me as absurdly broad, and I find it difficult to believe any scientific committee of twelve people could possibly do a responsible job of handling submissions from such diverse areas.