국가유공자요건비해당결정취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On June 30, 1980, the Plaintiff entered the Gun and was discharged from military service on September 11, 1982, and filed an application for registration as a person of distinguished service to the State on January 1, 1982 (hereinafter “instant case”). Around January 1, 1982, the Plaintiff: (a) fell on the vehicle repair unit No. 11 earth unit No. 6 group No. 11 group No. 11 group No. 11 group No. 3 group No. 11 group No. 4-5 group; and (b) was under training and training on March 1982, 1982; and (c) went into operation after undergoing a diagnosis of the necessary signboard escape certificate at a military hospital; and (d) applied for registration as a person of distinguished service to the State on July 28, 2014.
B. On December 1, 2014, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition against the Plaintiff on December 1, 2014, “A person eligible for veteran’s compensation under the Act on Support for Persons Eligible for Veteran’s Compensation, but does not meet the requirements for a person of distinguished service to the State under the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State.”
(1) 【No dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff alleged that there was no anything anything else before he fell from the vehicle maintenance team on January 1, 1982, and even though he was injured on two occasions, the plaintiff did not immediately receive proper treatment and did not have been able to complete training. Thus, the difference in this case occurred due to an accident that occurred in the course of performing duties or education and training directly related to the national security, etc., and the symptoms rapidly aggravated due to the above continuous performance of duties or education and training. Thus, the difference in this case falls under the requirements for persons who rendered distinguished services to the State.
(b).