logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.03.09 2017구단78776
상이등급결정취소
Text

1. The part of the claim for a disability rating 3 among the instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff is a person discharged from active service on June 30, 1971, entering the Marine Corps on June 4, 1970.

B. On April 21, 1971, the Vietnam War Wared on April 21, 1971, the Plaintiff suffered from ebboxing, ebbreging, leaving the ebreging, leaving the ebreging, leaving the ebreging, leaving the ebreging, leaving the ebreging, leaving the ebreging, having the ebreging, having the ebreging, having the ebreging, and having the ebreging, having been registered as a person of distinguished service to the State (hereinafter “

C. On July 22, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a physical examination for a trial with the Defendant on September 1, 2016, and received a physical examination for a trial at the Central Veterans Hospital. On August 29, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to determine the Plaintiff’s disability ratings as Class 4, class 9040 (Class 5, class 7112, class 712 of class 5, class 7, class 7112 of class 6, class 6, class 6, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 7120 of class 6, class 714 of class 6, class 712 of class 6, “the number of left-off portion portion portion”, and class 7, class 4115, respectively, of class 7, class 4115 of class “the left-hand portion portion and the left-hand portion portion”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. It is not easy to specify the degree of injury of a person of distinguished service to the State who has been recognized different from the Plaintiff in accordance with the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State (hereinafter “Act”).

However, among the Plaintiff’s wounds in this case, it is clear that the “frighting cutting” constitutes class 3 2 of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (including a person who has lost his or her severe finger, who has lost his or her 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’

Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful.

arrow