logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.10.23 2017누74476
국가유공자등록거부처분등취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The grounds for admitting the judgment of the court of first instance, which the Plaintiff asserted in the trial while appealed, are not significantly different from the contents of the Plaintiff’s assertion in the court of first instance. However, even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance shows the written opinion of the professional examiners of this court, it is acknowledged that the fact-finding and determination of the court of first instance are legitimate, even

Therefore, the reasoning of this Court is that the reasoning of this case is stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the modification of the seven to eighteen parts of the judgment of the first instance as follows. Thus, this case is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Article 8 (Method of Inspection, etc.) of the Rules on Examinations, including the Physical Examination in the Military Service, is not provided for a separate method of inspection with regard to the external appearance and the area of the body during the physical examination in the Military Service, and thus, any method other than monitoring the external appearance of the body is deemed not to have been carried out. Meanwhile, Article 9 (1) of the Rules provides that all persons subject to the physical examination shall be exposed to a scarcity, but the subject is limited to a “scarcity” and the subject is limited to a “scarcity,” and it does not appear to be a material to determine whether the body is abnormal than the external appearance and the heart. Considering the above method of the physical examination in the Military Service, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Plaintiff was subject to a normal judgment by having been judged on the external appearance and the area of the scarcity and the area of the scarcity and the scarcity and the scarcity of the scarcity and the scarcity of the scarcity and the scarcity of the scar.

2. Conclusion, the plaintiff .

arrow