2015Guhap8206 Decision to dismiss the application for payment of consolation money, etc.

A

The Support Committee for Investigation of Damage from Force Mobilization during the Time of the Counter-Japan and Victims, etc. of Force Mobilization;

September 17, 2015

November 12, 2015

1. The decision to dismiss the payment of consolation benefits made by the Defendant to the Plaintiff on April 30, 2015 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the disposition;

On June 24, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for the payment of consolation benefits pursuant to Article 27 (1) of the Special Act on the Investigation of Forced Mobilization and Support for Victims of Overseas Force Mobilization, etc. (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) with the head of Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, who was delegated by the Defendant to receive the application for the payment of consolation benefits from the Defendant, by birth of BC, who is the father of the Plaintiff, and died on August 19, 197, hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) and became a victim of forced mobilization in Korea due to forced mobilization in accordance with the Japanese colonial rule, and the Plaintiff filed an application for the payment of consolation benefits in accordance with Article 27 (1) of the same Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Special Act on the Support of Victims, etc. of Forced Mobilization for the Japanese War”). The Defendant is recognized as having returned to the Republic of Korea from 1942 to 1945 and did not have any grounds to recognize that the deceased was a victim of forced mobilization or of injury in the Republic of Korea (hereinafter referred to the Plaintiff).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 4-1, 2, Gap evidence 5, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

In around 1942, when a deceased person was mobilized compulsorily under the Japanese colonial rule and forced labor in the workplace located in Southyang-do as a worker, a combat machine was brupted and evacuateed to the air defense, resulting in an obstacle that makes it impossible for a deceased person to wear his/her hand over to the earth he/she was deprived of. Accordingly, the deceased person constitutes "in cases where he/she was forced to be mobilized overseas and suffered from an injury" as stipulated in Article 4 subparagraph 2 of the Act.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

According to subparagraph 3 (a) of Article 2 of the Act and Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Special Act on the Investigation into Force Forced Mobilization during the Time of War and the Support for Victims of Mobilizationd Overseas (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree”), a person who was killed or missing or wounded due to a disease recognized by the subcommittee on the judgment of disability grade as a victim of compulsory mobilization overseas pursuant to subparagraph 6 of Article 8 of the Act shall be a victim of compulsory mobilization overseas. According to Article 4 subparagraph 2 of the Act, if a victim of compulsory mobilization overseas suffers from an injury due to compulsory mobilization overseas and an injury, the degree of disability prescribed by Presidential Decree shall not exceed 20,000 won per victim of compulsory mobilization overseas within the limit of 20,000 won per victim of compulsory mobilization overseas, shall be paid as consolation benefits for the victims or bereaved family members of compulsory mobilization overseas, taking into account the degree of disability prescribed by Presidential Decree within the limit of 20,000 won per victim of compulsory mobilization overseas.

Considering the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that a deceased person sustained injury to the extent that it may cause the permanent reduction of labor force during the compulsory mobilization period, in light of the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 4, 5, 9, and 10 as well as the purport of the entire pleadings.

1) 고인의 조카인 D(1937년 생)는 2015. 3. 26. 피고 직원이 조사할 때 '고인과 한 동네에 살았다. 고인이 강제동원된 후 돌아왔을 때 손가락이 오그라들어서 펴지지 않았는데 어느 쪽 손인지는 모르겠다. 고인의 손바닥 가운데 흉터가 깊숙이 있었고 제법 컸으며 고인이 주먹을 쥔 것도 아니고 손가락이 반쯤 구부러졌다.'고 진술하였다.

2) In the remarks column of an application for the issuance of a resident registration certificate prepared by a senior person on October 15, 1975, the public official stated that “the main name is a person who is unable to meet because of his superior situation.” In light of the above contents, it can be found that the senior person suffered an injury to his left hand before October 15, 1975, and that there was an obstacle to leaving his hand. Meanwhile, the defendant asserts that the above disability of the senior person was caused before the compulsory mobilization period, since the above application for the issuance of the resident registration certificate stated that “the time when the senior person suffers an injury” was stated as “the time when the injury was sustained.” However, even if the above time meaning as “time”, there is no other evidence to deem that the senior person suffered an injury before the compulsory mobilization, and ② in light of the possibility that the senior person was forced to have been mobilized before the mobilization of his resident registration certificate at the time of his application for the issuance of the resident registration certificate as above, it cannot be seen that the injury was caused before the mobilization period (as above).

3) On March 30, 2015 and March 31, 2015, E, an employee of the Defendant, who was living in the same Dong Dong Dong Dong Dong, stated that he was aware of the fact that he was able to be called "at the time when he was investigated into the Southyang-gun, and that he returned to the South," and that he was unaware of the fact that he did not have any other physical inconvenience than the Defendant 2's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son'.

4) Article 3(1) and 3(1) [Attachment 1] of the Enforcement Decree of the Act provides that "a person who is unable to have inspected the second hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand over by the second hand," and "a person who cannot have inspected the hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand over other than the hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand and hand hand hand hand hand over by the second hand," falls under class 14 of the Enforcement Decree.

In light of the above circumstances, the disability grade of an ancient person may be deemed to fall under class 13 or 14.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted for the reasons and it is so decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge, judges and vice-ranking

Judges Kim Yong-han

Judges Seo-chul

A person shall be appointed.