특수임무수행자보상금등지급신청기각결정취소
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 18, 1965, the Plaintiff entered the military service team (25 solidarity) and was assigned to the Army intelligence team on September 20, 1965. From October 2, 1965, the Plaintiff was assigned to the fleet, and was discharged on December 9, 1967.
B. On May 27, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for payment of compensation under Article 10(1) of the Act on the Compensation for Persons who performed Special Military Missions (hereinafter “Specialized Employment Compensation Act”) by asserting that “a person was expelled from the Military Demarcation Line and carried out a special mission beyond the Military Demarcation Line on June 1967.”
C. On September 27, 2016, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff’s application on the ground that “the Plaintiff’s work as an active duty support personnel at the military intelligence unit is verified, but it is confirmed that the Plaintiff performed a special mission or received no training.”
hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"
(D) On November 8, 2016, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to verify relevant data, and applied for review pursuant to Article 13(1) of the Act on the Compensation for the Aggravated Child. However, on February 28, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision of dismissal on the same ground as the instant disposition, and notified the Plaintiff of the decision on March 9, 2017. [Grounds for recognition] The Plaintiff did not dispute (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da1548, Nov. 8, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply).
No. 4-1 of the evidence No. 4-1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. On September 13, 1967, the plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff reached the enemy's radiation dust exceeding the Military Demarcation Line with six members of the military intelligence unit, four civilian workers, one collected official work worker, and he reached the enemy's radiation dust, and then, he was discovered during the process that private workers were able to spread the enemy's radiation dust.
Since a special mission was performed by cutting the steel on the 14th day of the same month, a person who performed a special mission is a person who performed a special mission under the Act on the Compensation for
This has been carried out together with a brief report on the behavior of the master and the plaintiff's special mission.