국가유공자요건비해당결정취소
1. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.
2. The Defendant’s person eligible for veteran’s compensation against the Plaintiff on June 16, 2016.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On November 3, 2008, the Plaintiff’s son B (hereinafter “the deceased”) entered the Army Training Center and completed a 4-day new illness training at the Army Training Center and a 1-day education at the Central Police School, and then on December 18, 2018, the Plaintiff’s son B (hereinafter “the network”) was assigned to the Provincial Police Agency C as of December 18, 2018 and served as the police.
B. From August 24, 2009 to June 7, 2009, the Deceased was killed on the 10th floor of the residential apartment at around 05:30 on August 30, 2009, when he/she was living in the area located in Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-si D, Seocheon-si.
C. On August 29, 2012, the deceased’s surviving family members, including the Plaintiff, filed a lawsuit seeking damages against the Republic of Korea as a father of the Incheon District Court Branch 2012Gahap6423 on August 29, 2012. On July 22, 2015, the above court rendered a judgment of partially citing the claim for damages on the ground that the proximate causal relation between the deceased’s breach of duty of care, such as commander, and the deceased’s suicide was recognized, and
On December 2, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for registration as a bereaved family member of a person who has rendered distinguished services to the State or a person eligible for veteran’s compensation. Accordingly, on June 16, 2016, the Defendant rendered a ruling that the Plaintiff does not meet the requirements for disaster death in accordance with the Act on the Honorable Treatment of and Support for Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “the Act on the Honorable Treatment of Persons of Distinguished Services to the State”) on the grounds that “it is difficult to deem that the deceased died during the performance of military duties or education and training directly related to the national defense, etc. or that there was a proximate causal relation with the performance of military duties and education and training of the State.” (hereinafter “the Act on the
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion commander, etc. is a military unit life.