생계곤란 병역감면거부처분취소및상근예비역 입영처분취소
1. On April 27, 2017, the part concerning the claim for cancellation of enlistment in the full-time reserve service as of April 27, 2017, shall be dismissed.
2. The plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On October 11, 2012, the Plaintiff was determined as a physical grade 3 as a result of a draft physical examination on October 201, 2012, and became a person subject to active duty service. However, from December 3, 2013 to October 13, 2015, the Plaintiff postponed their respective enlistment on the grounds of high school uniforms scheduled from December 3, 2013 to October 2015.
나. 이후 원고가 상근예비역소집 대상자로 선발됨에 따라 피고는 2016. 7. 20. 원고에게 상근예비역으로 입영할 것을 통지(입영부대 9사단, 입영일자 2016. 9. 20.)하였다.
C. On September 19, 2016, the Plaintiff submitted to the Defendant the reduction of and exemption from military service due to the difficulty in maintaining livelihood by asserting that the Plaintiff constitutes “a person who is not the principal and is unable to maintain his family’s livelihood” under Article 62(1)1 of the Military Service Act.
On January 19, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition rejecting the Plaintiff’s application for military service reduction and exemption (hereinafter “instant disposition of refusal”) on the ground that “The Defendant, after ex officio extension of the date of enlistment, has a property that may assist the obligor’s family in terms of KRW 38,00,00,000,00,000, and the property of the father and the deceased and mother is deemed unreasonable to take measures for military service reduction and exemption on the ground that the obligor’s livelihood is difficult.”
마. 그 후 피고는 2017. 4. 27. 원고에게 상근예비역으로 입영할 것을 통지(입영부대 9사단, 입영일자 2017. 7. 3.)하였다
(hereinafter referred to as “instant enlistment notice”). 【The ground for recognition” has no dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 4, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Whether the part requesting cancellation of the enlistment notice in the instant lawsuit is legitimate
A. Since the Defendant’s main defense to safety had postponed the Plaintiff’s enlistment date ex officio on July 4, 2017, the part regarding the instant claim for cancellation of the enlistment notice in the instant lawsuit is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.
B. Article 61(1) of the Military Service Act provides that “A person who received a notice of conscription or call-up shall suffer from a disease.”