2014Nu7078 Revocation of a decision that constitutes a requirement for persons of distinguished service to the State

University of Gyeongsan-si 13 degrees

Law Firm Cheong (Law Firm Cheong, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Attorney Lee Sang-hoon, Lee Jong-won

Head of Daegu Regional Veterans Administration

Litigation performers, public-service advocates and vice versa

Daegu District Court Decision 2013Gudan10927 Decided December 5, 2014

December 11, 2015

January 22, 2016

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

1. Purport of claim

A. The primary claim: the Defendant’s primary claim is revoked on September 12, 2013, where the portion of the decision rendered by the person who rendered distinguished services to the State was rendered by the Plaintiff.

B. Preliminary claim: On September 12, 2013, the Defendant’s disposition against the Plaintiff as not eligible for veteran’s compensation is revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.

3. Scope of the judgment of this court.

The court of first instance accepted the Plaintiff’s claim for revocation of the pertinent decision-making disposition against the Plaintiff’s conjunctive claimant, and dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim for revocation of the pertinent decision-making disposition against the person of distinguished service to the State. Accordingly, this court’s appellate judgment is limited to the conjunctive claim seeking revocation of the pertinent decision-making disposition against the Defendant, the losing part of the Defendant.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The circumstances cited in the judgment of the first instance court are as follows: (a) physical examination of the following circumstances acknowledged by the result of physical entrustment to the president of the Ganbuk University Hospital; (b) there is no clear indication of the causes of the outbreak of the Clonylon disease, which is the disease of this case; and (c) currently, Clony's disease does not classify it as the cause of immunity; and (d) up to now, there is no report on the causal relationship between the Plaintiff's disease and the Plaintiff's disease in the whole world, i.e., e., e., cronic disease of this case; (b) there is a lot of reports on the aggravation of the symptoms of Clony's mental or physical stress after the outbreak of Clony's disease; (c) if the Plaintiff was under stress due to an act of violence, such as dust and malodor emitted from garbage and waste while serving in the military, it is recognized that the Plaintiff could have an influence on the aggravation of the disease of this case by being separated from the medical stress and other acts of this case.

Therefore, the Plaintiff recognized a proximate causal relationship between the instant shopping branch and the Plaintiff’s performance of official duties.

The judgment of the court of first instance, which judged that the person eligible for veteran's compensation is subject to "disaster and injury police" under Article 2 (1) 2 of the Act on Support for Persons Eligible for Veteran's Compensation, is justifiable.

Therefore, the court's explanation on the instant case is based on the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the above determination and the dismissal of some of the contents as follows. Thus, it is based on Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The "Act on Veterans' Compensation for Persons Eligible for Veteran's Compensation", which will be multiplied by the 6th day of the judgment of the first instance court, is called "Act on Support for Persons Eligible for Veteran's Compensation (a short name: Veterans' Compensation Act)".

The "Act on the Compensation for Veterans' Compensation" in the 8 fifth fifth fifth fifth judgment of the first instance court is "the Act on the Compensation for Veterans' Compensation", and the "the degree of wounds" in thehh is different from the other "the other" as "the other".

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's conjunctive claim seeking revocation of the decision-making disposition as non-person eligible for veteran's compensation is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Private Jins (Presiding Judge)

Future A

Note :