국가유공자요건비해당결정취소
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. On May 19, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person who has rendered distinguished services to the State on the ground that he/she suffered from wounds and cerebral cerebral ties in the operation of armed communist militia bath. On December 7, 2017, the Defendant decided that the Plaintiff constitutes a person who has rendered distinguished services to the State, but is not a person who has rendered distinguished services to the State, and that the Plaintiff’s injury does not constitute both a person who has rendered distinguished services to the State and a person eligible for veteran’s compensation.
On December 7, 2017, the Plaintiff sought revocation of the decision corresponding to the person who rendered distinguished service to the Plaintiff on December 7, 2017, and the Defendant sought revocation of the decision corresponding to the person who rendered distinguished service to the Plaintiff on December 7, 2017. On December 7, 2017, the first instance court accepted the Plaintiff’s primary claim that the Defendant sought revocation of the decision corresponding to the person who rendered distinguished service to the Plaintiff on December 7, 2017, and rejected both the Plaintiff’s primary claim and the conjunctive claim.
Since only the Defendant appealed against this, the part of the Plaintiff’s claim of this case was separately determined. The scope of this Court’s adjudication is limited to the portion of the Defendant’s non-applicable decision of persons of distinguished service to the State on December 7, 2017, on which the Defendant rendered a non-applicable decision of persons of distinguished service to the State.
2. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance for the acceptance of this case is to be stated by the court of first instance as the "Seoul Administrative Court", and each of the five pages 10 and 11 "this court" shall be used as the "first instance court", and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the defendant's assertion that is emphasized by the court of first instance, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
【Supplementary Decision】
A. The defendant's arguments are D Injury and Disease.