재확인 신체검사 등 판정처분 취소
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 November 26, 2010, the Plaintiff entered the Army and served as a supervisory officer of the Infrastructure Corporation B as of November 26, 2010, and was discharged from military service on August 31, 2012.
B. Around 2013, the Plaintiff was recognized by the Defendant as having been wounded in the course of performing his duties in the military unit, and was determined as having been subject to a soldier, police officer, etc., and was subject to a disposition falling short of the disability rating standards in a new physical examination. After that, the Plaintiff was subject to a disposition falling short of the disability rating standards in a physical examination and re-verification examination.
C. On September 16, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for a re-verification physical examination with the Defendant, and on December 9, 2015, the Defendant rendered a judgment below the rating standard for the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4 (including virtual numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The degree of injury of the Plaintiff’s assertion that the injury of the Plaintiff’s “the pellet saf and the right pelvis,” constitutes either “Class 6(2)(8119)” or “Class 7(8122(2)(i.e., class 6(2)(819) or “Class 7(2)(i.
The defendant's disposition of this case on a different premise is unlawful.
3. According to the results of the appraisal and fact-finding conducted on the head of the Yyang University Hospital, the court of this case regarding whether the disability rating due to the difference in the "Yeak Yeak, the right visvise," suffered by the plaintiff's judgment on the legality of the disposition of this case, constitutes "Seak and satisfaction vis-vis-vis-vis" or "Seng 8122" or "Seak vis-vis-vis-vis," the right vis-vis-vise of this case is not a "seak and satisfaction vis-vis-vis". The right vis-vis-vise is not a "seng and satisfaction vis-vis-vis" but a "seng vis-vis-vis" can be recognized, and the right vis-vise-vise is not a normal range of satisfaction vis-vis-vis-