국가유공자 및 보훈보상대상자 요건비해당처분 취소 청구의 소
The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal are the judgment of the first instance.
The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is reasonable, and therefore, it is cited for this judgment in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
The plaintiff asserts that the difference in this Court also occurred during the military service as the disease that occurred during the performance of duties or in the course of education and training (referred to as Ma11, Ma21, Ma21, Ma21, Ma12, Ma22) and that the difference in this case (referred to as Ma23, Ma23, Ma13, Ma13, Ma12, Ma22, Ma22).
However, in various circumstances cited in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance cited earlier, “The occurrence of euthanasia was involved in various factors, such as the environment in the mouth and the management of oral hygiene, etc., so that the euthanasia caused by the euthanasia in the left-hand check ( Ma23 Measia) was treated as the euasia.
It is difficult to conclude it.
“Along with the result of this court’s factual inquiry about the solicitation of the first instance court’s appraisal, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the instant wound was caused by the performance of military duties or education and training at the time of military service or that the instant wound was rapidly aggravated above the natural progress, and there is no other sufficient evidence to deem otherwise.
Plaintiff
We do not accept the argument.
The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed for lack of reason.