A. The Plaintiff’s husband B entered the Army on April 5, 1952 and participated in the battle of Mamast on July 22, 1953, but suffered from the difference in the so-called “the difference in this case”) of the so-called so-called so-called so-called the so-called so-called “the so-called so-called the so-called “satison”).

B. B received notification from the Defendant on February 28, 1990 that the instant wound was attributable to the injury during battle, on the ground that it did not meet the criteria for disability ratings under the Act on the Honorable Treatment, etc. of Persons of Distinguished Service to the State, which was enforced at the time of the physical examination, on the ground that the instant wound did not meet the criteria for disability ratings under the Act on the Honorable Treatment, etc. of Persons of Distinguished Service to the State.

C. Since then, B died on February 27, 200 (hereinafter referred to as “B”), and the Plaintiff, as a bereaved family member of the deceased, filed an application for registration of bereaved family members of a person who has rendered distinguished services to the State on July 2, 2014 pursuant to Article 6(1) of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “Act”).

D. On July 4, 2014, the Defendant issued a notice of non-eligible persons for registration of persons of distinguished service to the State (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that: (a) the subject of determination by documentary examination under Article 13 subparag. 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Persons of Distinguished Service to the State should fall under the case of death of the wounded who was subject to the application of the former or soldier or policeman on duty; and (b) the deceased had already filed an application for registration of persons of distinguished service to the State before his/her death on February 27, 200 and did not receive disability rating after he/she was determined as the person eligible for the application of persons of distinguished service to the State.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through Gap evidence 4, Gap evidence 8, Gap evidence 9, Gap evidence 13, Gap evidence 14, Gap evidence 15, Gap evidence 16, and the whole purport of the arguments

A. The defendant's assertion

In order to make a refusal disposition subject to appeal litigation, ① the contents of the application are the exercise of public authority, ② the refusal directly affects the rights and obligations of the people, ③ the existence of the application. The deceased is subject to the examination of grade standards in a physical examination for disability rating after having already filed an application for registration of persons of distinguished service to the State before death, and the deceased is subject to the examination of grade standards in a physical examination for disability rating classification. Thus, there is no application right to request a new determination of disability rating through the examination of the deceased in the case of the plaintiff. Accordingly, since the disposition of this case did not meet the requirements of rejection disposition subject to appeal litigation, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful.

B. Determination

On the other hand, the existence of the right to apply as a prerequisite for the recognition of the disposition of refusal is determined abstractly by examining, in a specific case, the applicant's interpretation of the relevant laws and regulations without considering who is the applicant, and it does not mean the right for the applicant to obtain the satisfactory result of the acceptance of the application beyond the right to respond just to the application. Therefore, if the citizen makes a request, if it seems that the citizen's right to apply to an administrative action is recognized in accordance with the interpretation of the provision that provides the basis for the application, the refusal shall be deemed a disposition subject to appeal, and it shall be determined specifically by the applicant (see Supreme Court Decision 95Nu12460, Jun. 11, 1996).

In light of the above legal principles, the plaintiff, as a bereaved family member of the deceased, can apply for the registration of bereaved family members of the deceased to the Minister of Patriots and Veterans Affairs pursuant to Article 6 (1) of the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State, and as seen earlier, the defendant cannot apply for the registration of bereaved family members of the deceased for the registration of bereaved family members for reasons that "the deceased is a person who had already applied for the registration of persons of distinguished services to the State before his/her birth and has been judged below the disability rating and cannot be subject to documentary examination." This is an act that directly affects the plaintiff's rights and duties (if the plaintiff cannot seek the cancellation of the disposition of this case, it shall be deemed that the judicial decision on whether the plaintiff is subject to documentary examination

As the plaintiff has a benefit to seek cancellation of the disposition of this case, the defendant's prior defense on the merits is not accepted.

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

According to Article 13 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Persons of Distinguished Services to the State, "where a person is unable to undergo the relevant physical examination without any reason attributable to himself/herself among the persons subject to physical examination under Article 6-3 (2) of the Act on the Persons of Distinguished

However, according to the Act on the Honorable Treatment, etc. of Persons of Distinguished Service to the State, which was enforced at the time of the death, the deceased did not constitute the lowest disability rating. However, around 2000, the time of the death of the Plaintiff, there was a room to constitute the lowest disability rating due to the amendment of the relevant Act and subordinate statutes, and thus, the deceased constitutes a case where he died without undergoing a physical examination for re-verification without any cause.

Therefore, it is subject to documentary examination as stipulated in Article 13 subparagraph 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State. Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful on different premise.

B. Relevant statutes

The entries in the attached Table-related statutes are as follows.

C. Determination

1) Article 6-3(1) of the Act on the Persons of Distinguished Services to the State provides that the Minister of Patriots and Veterans Affairs shall conduct a physical examination to determine whether a wounded person is subject to the Act on the Persons of Distinguished Services to the State pursuant to Article 4(1)4 of the Act on the Persons of Distinguished Services to the State and to determine his/her disability rating due to the degree of his/her injury or the change of his/her injury, etc.; however, the physical examination to determine a disability rating of a wounded person may be conducted in documentary examination; Article 13 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Persons of Distinguished Services to the State refers to cases falling under any of the following subparagraphs. Article 6-3(2) of the Act provides that:

On the other hand, Article 6-3 (2) 3 of the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State stipulates that "physical examination conducted for persons who have failed to receive a disability rating in a new physical examination or physical examination," as a type of physical examination, and Article 15 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State stipulates that persons who have failed to receive a disability rating in a new physical examination or physical examination shall be subject to a disability rating after two years from the date of the determination, or after two years from the date of the determination, or after

If there are reasonable grounds, the Minister of Patriots and Veterans Affairs may apply for a physical examination for re-verification when applying for registration in accordance with Article 6(1) of the Act.

2) Therefore, we examine whether the deceased constitutes "the case where he/she died without undergoing the relevant physical examination without any cause attributable to himself/herself among persons subject to physical examination" under Article 13 subparagraph 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State

The following circumstances can be acknowledged by the overall purport of each evidence and oral argument, i.e., (i) where the deceased was judged below his/her grade as a result of a new physical examination, (ii) where two years have passed since the date of determination below his/her grade, he/she may undergo a re-physical examination while applying for registration of persons of distinguished service to the State, and (iii) where the deceased was unable to undergo the physical examination under Article 13 subparagraph 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Persons of Distinguished Service to the State without undergoing the relevant physical examination, and (ii) where the deceased died on February 27, 200, he/she was revised on December 31, 199 and enforced on February 1, 200, and his/her bereaved family members were unable to receive the physical examination under the current Act on Persons of Distinguished Service to the State without being able to receive the physical examination, it is difficult to view the deceased's disability rating as a result of the examination without being able to receive the physical examination before his/her death before the date.

3) Therefore, the defendant should undergo a substantive examination as to whether the instant disability constitutes a disability rating under the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State through a documentary examination of the deceased, and on different premise, the disposition of refusing to apply for registration of bereaved family members of the plaintiff on the ground that the deceased was not the subject of disability rating by documentary examination is unlawful

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is decided as per Disposition by admitting it.

Judges Kim Gung-hoon,

Judges Unauthorizedd Judge

(ii) a physical examination conducted for persons who have an objection to a determination of a new physical examination;

A person shall be appointed.