logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.12.20 2018구단20194
보훈보상자 비해당처분 취소
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. On June 11, 1960, the Plaintiff was discharged from military service on July 25, 1962, as Second Lieutenant to the Army.

B. On February 13, 2018, the Plaintiff asserted that he/she was infected with pulmonary tuberculosis due to an inferior environment during his/her work, and filed an application for registration with the Defendant on February 13, 2018 (hereinafter “instant injury”). On May 30, 2018, the Defendant notified on May 30, 2018 that the Plaintiff was determined as a non-conformity with the requirements under Article 4(1)6 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State, and as a requirement under Article 2(1)2 of the Act on the Support for Persons of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State”).

C. Since then, the Plaintiff received a physical examination of the instant wounds at the Central Veterans Hospital (hereinafter “instant physical examination”). The result did not meet the criteria set out in the classification table of disability ratings under attached Table 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Patriots and Veterans Compensation Act, and the Defendant, on August 2, 2018, notified the Plaintiff of the determination on whether he/she was eligible for veteran’s compensation (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1, 3 through 7, Evidence Nos. 1 to 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant wound occurred while receiving training to become an officer by entering the military as a goal of military life, and serving as a volunteer military commander for a long time. Since then, the State ordered the Plaintiff to discharge from military service without appropriate compensation.

Accordingly, after discharge, the Plaintiff treated the instant wounds by making efforts to separate the instant wounds, and the Defendant did not compensate for such unfair situation of the Plaintiff, and the Defendant is obliged to be suffering from the instant wounds even after the lapse of 50 years from the date of the occurrence of the instant wounds.

arrow