beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. At the time of the disturbance on August 625, 1950, the Plaintiff was abolished pursuant to Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Addenda of the former Act on the Honorable Treatment, etc. of Persons of Distinguished Service to the State (No. 3742, No. 3742, and No. 2 of the former Act on the Honorable Treatment, etc. of Persons of Distinguished Service to the State, etc. (No. 3742, No. 3748, Aug. 2, 1984).
In accordance with the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State on January 13, 1997, the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State was registered as a person of distinguished service to the State on January 13, 1997 (hereinafter “the Act on the Honorable Treatment, etc.”) and was judged as Grade 5 of the disability rating on May 27, 2003.
B. On November 8, 2012, the Plaintiff applied for a re-examination to raise the disability rating to the Defendant, but the Defendant determined the Plaintiff’s disability rating as Class 6 Paragraph 1 below the existing Grade 5 according to the result of the re-examination conducted by the Central Veterans Hospital on December 27, 2012.
C. On January 14, 2015, the Plaintiff applied for a new physical examination for trial again to the Defendant.
On February 25, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff, on April 28, 2015, that disability ratings fall under class 6 (1) of the same grade as before, on the following grounds, according to the result of the physical examination conducted at the Central Veterans Hospital (hereinafter “instant physical examination”).
(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition in this case"). As a result of the different judgment, a person whose level of light of employment is restricted due to a comprehensive judgment of grade 6, class 2, class 7308, class 6, class 7, class 7, class 4115, class 7, class 4115 on the right-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-hand side-surgy side-surgical ability of 0.02, not more than 0.4, and who has correction ability of other eyes less than 0.4 (e.g., 00, not more than 0. 02, 0. 0. 2), has no dispute, and there is no ground for recognition, as a whole, the statement in the whole pleadings.