Seongbuk-gu Seoul Bomunro 30 Street

Attorney Kim- support, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

The Head of the Seoul Northern Branch Office

Litigation Performers Kim Jong-soo

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

A. On March 23, 1983, the Plaintiff entered the Army and discharged from military service on August 8, 1985, with the maturity of August 8, 1985, by entering the Army.

B. On May 1984, while the Plaintiff was serving in the 7th group of Bosil, the Plaintiff was faced with an accident that is booming on the right side floor, the right side knick, etc. due to mine explosion (hereinafter referred to as the “accident in this case”). While having been serving in the 7th group of Bosil, the Plaintiff was suffering from macking on the right side side mack, mackt, etc.

C. Around November 1, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person of distinguished service to the Republic of Korea with brain or higher (mental fission; hereinafter “mental fission”) due to the instant accident (hereinafter “mental fission”) on the ground of the injury, but the Defendant determined on February 25, 2014 that the Plaintiff applied for registration of a person of distinguished service to the Republic of Korea on the ground that he/she was wounded in performing duties or education and training directly related to the national defense, security, etc., and that he/she fell under the category of a soldier or policeman of distinguished service to the State on the ground that he/she was determined as wounded in the course of performing duties or education and training directly related to the national defense, security, etc., or that he/she was wounded in the course of performing duties or education and training other than duties, or that he/she did not meet the requirements of a soldier or policeman of distinguished service to the State on the ground that he/she did not meet the requirements of a soldier or policeman of distinguished service to the State on the ground that he/she was wounded.

D. On March 25, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the non-recognitiond mental fission with estimated data attached to the Defendant. However, on May 21, 2014, the Defendant rendered a decision on the non-existence of the requirements for persons of distinguished service to the State (person and police officer on duty) and (person and person and person and person and person and person and responsible for veteran’s compensation (hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition”) to the effect that the mental fission certificate, who is the applicant and wounded, directly related to the national defense, was generated due to military performance or education and training, or that the proximate causal relation with the military performance or education and training, is not recognized.

[Grounds for Recognition] The non-contentious facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Although the mental fission, which is the difference between the plaintiff's application, aggravated due to the accident of this case, there is a proximate causal relation with the military non-performance, the disposition of this case made by the defendant on a different premise is unlawful.

B. Determination

1 ) 갑 제2 내지 9호증 , 갑 제10호증의 1 , 2 , 3 , 갑 제11 , 12 , 13호증 , 갑 제14호증 의 1 내지 6 , 갑 제15호증의 각 기재 , 증인 박◎◎ , 김○○의 각 증언에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면 , 원고는 군 입대 당시 징병을 위한 신체검사결과 현역병 판정을 받아 1983 . 3 . 23 . 현역병으로 입대한 사실 , 원고는 1983 . 5 . 8 . 보병 제7사단 3연대 ( 강원 화 천군의 중동부전선을 사수하는 전방 일반 철책 초소 ( GOP ) 사단이다 ) 에 배치되어 기관 총병으로 복무하던 중 1984 . 5 . 경 비무장지대에서 보안등 설치작업을 하다가 지뢰폭발 사고인 이 사건 사고를 당하여 우측 척골 파편상 , 우측 엉덩이 파편상을 입었고 , 1984 . 5 . 30 . 부터 1984 . 6 . 5 . 까지 위 공상으로 사단의무대에서 입원치료를 받은 사실 , 원고는 1984 . 6 . 25 . 공상인 우상악동염 , 치근단농양이 발병되어 1984 . 7 . 10 . 사단의무대에서 치료를 받다가 제101야전병원 ( 나중에 국군춘천병원으로 개칭되었다 ) 으로 후송되어 1984 . 8 . 6 . 부터 1984 . 10 . 4 . 까지 입원치료를 받았는데 , 1984 . 8 . 18 . 담당 군의관에게 약 3달 전 발생한 이 사건 사고로 파편이 우측 수부와 우측 엉덩이에 박혀 있다고 호 소한 사실 , 원고는 같은 날 정형외과에 협진 의뢰되었고 , 우측 수부의 감각 및 운동능 력은 정상이나 우측 엉덩이에 저린감 및 방사통이 지속되었는데 , 단순 방사선 사진을 촬영한 결과 1984 . 8 . 22 . 원고의 우측 수부의 척골 및 엉덩이에 작은 이물질이 발견되 어 약물치료를 받은 사실 , 원고는 이 사건 사고 이후부터 침울 , 불안 증세를 보이기 시 작하여 제대 직후에는 오물 , 비눗물 , 담배꽁초를 주워 먹고 ' 내가 왕이다 ' 라고 소리를 지르거나 공격적 태도를 보이는 등 부적절한 언행을 일삼았으며 환청을 듣기까지 하여 정상적인 대인관계나 일상생활을 할 수 없는 상태에 이른 사실 , 이에 원고는 1998 . 12 . 7 . 부터 서울아산병원 정신과에서 위 정신병증에 대하여 진료를 받기 시작하여 2014 . 7 . 21 . 까지 꾸준히 편집성 정신분열병 , 상세불명의 비기질적 정신병 등의 진단 하에 상담 , 약물치료 등의 진료를 받아왔으나 증상이 지속된 사실 , 원고는 2013 . 2 . 25 . 서울아산 병원에서 사회적 인지 기능이 부족하여 부적절한 언행을 보이고 사회생활 적응에 어려 움이 있는 상태에 해당한다는 이유로 정신분열병 진단을 받은 사실 , 한편 원고는 1977 . 3 . 3 . 용문고등학교에 입학하여 1980 . 2 . 29 . 졸업하였는데 , 생활기록부상 신체발 달상황란에 건강하고 이상이 없는 것으로 , 종합란에 학업은 부진하나 모든 면에서 원 만하고 착실하다는 취지로 기록된 사실 , 원고는 1980 . 3 . 10 . 명지전문대학 공업경영과 에 입학하여 1983 . 2 . 24 . 학점을 모두 이수하고 별 문제 없이 졸업한 사실 , 원고의 가 족 중 원고와 같이 정신질환 증세를 보이거나 치료를 받은 사람은 확인되지 아니하는 사실을 인정할 수 있다 .

2) Each of the above facts found in the above facts, comprehensively taking account of the results of the request for examination of medical records from the head of the military school Synasium Synas University Synas Hospital in this court and the overall purport of arguments, namely, there is no evidence to deem that the plaintiff had mental capacity before entering the military, and rather, there is no evidence to support the fact that the plaintiff completed a physical examination at the time of entering the military without any problem and entered active duty service, and there is no evidence to support that the plaintiff had a family ability to physical examination at the time of entering the military, and that there was no evidence to support the plaintiff's mental disorder after the accident. In the event of a mine explosion, there is no evidence to prove that there was a serious mental shock of the plaintiff's mental disorder due to severe mental disorder other than physical pain, and that there is no possibility that the plaintiff's mental disorder or mental disorder was caused by the plaintiff's mental disorder before and after the accident, and thus, there is no possibility that the plaintiff's mental disorder treatment or mental shock measure of the case.

Inasmuch as the Plaintiff, who suffered from the instant accident, was presumed to have been suffering from mental shock, uneasiness, and stressed by the Defendant, the medical opinion that the instant accident may serve as one of the causes of stress immediately before the instant accident, and that it is difficult to view that the instant accident, among the medical opinions in the examination of medical records, was directly related to the instant accident, was based on the medical treatment of the Plaintiff, and that there was no significant causal relation between the Plaintiff’s mental disorder and that the instant accident was not directly related to the instant accident and the instant accident, and that there was no significant causal relation between the Plaintiff’s mental disorder and the instant accident and the instant accident, and that there was no need to consider that there was no significant causal relation between the Plaintiff’s mental disorder and the instant accident and the instant accident, and that there was no further causal relation between the Plaintiff’s mental disorder and the instant case’s mental disorder before the instant accident and the instant medical examination and treatment.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim shall be accepted for the reasons and it is so decided as per Disposition.