The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

1. The summary of the case and the facts premised on the case

A. The summary of the case is that the Plaintiff, the spouse of B, filed an appeal seeking the revocation of the disposition on the ground that the Defendant’s refusal to apply for the change of applicable classification as the bereaved family members of a soldier or policeman killed in action is illegal, asserting that the Plaintiff, not a soldier or policeman wounded in action under the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State (hereinafter

The judgment of the first instance dismissed all the plaintiff's claims, and the plaintiff appealed against them.

[Attachment of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes]

B. Evidence 10, B-1, 2, 3, and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings, which are premised on the premise, are as follows.

(1) 피고의 B에 대한 전상군경 해당 처분 ㈎ 원고는 2003. 6. 23. 피고에게 남편인 B이 1951. 3. 17. 육군에 입대하여 제11경비대대에서 복무하던 중 1952. 10. 14. 지리산에서 벌어진 전투에서 우 대퇴부 관통총상을 입고 육군병원에서 입원치료를 받다가 1953. 5. 13. 전역한 후 그 후유증으로 1983. 8. 4. 사망하였으므로 B이 국가유공자법에 정해진 전상군경에 해당한다며 국가유공자 유족등록을 신청하였다.

On March 29, 2004, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s application for registration as bereaved family members of a person who has rendered distinguished service to the State on the ground that it is medically difficult to recognize that he died from such wounds after having been discharged from military service by suffering from wounds during combat action.

㈏ 원고는 이에 불복하여 거부처분의 취소소송(서울행정법원 2004구합31811호)을 제기하였고, 심리한 결과 2005. 5. 18. B이 전몰군경에 해당한다고 할 수 없으나, 피고가 B이 전상군경에 해당하는지 여부를 판정하지 않고 국가유공자 유족등록신청을 거부한 것이 위법하다는 사유로 원고의 청구가 받아들여져 피고의 국가유공자 유족 비해당처분이 취소되었고,...