logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.05.31 2016구단7600
보훈보상대상자 요건 비해당 결정 처분 취소 청구의 소
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 May 14, 2012, the Plaintiff entered the Army and was discharged from military service on September 26, 2013.

B. On November 18, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State by asserting that he/she was suffering or aggravated in invertebrate (hereinafter “instant injury”). However, on March 14, 2014, the Defendant decided on the ground that there is no proximate causal relation with the performance of military duties, on the ground that the above injury and disease was not recognized.

C. The Plaintiff, who is dissatisfied with the above disposition, filed an administrative litigation with the Suwon District Court (2014Gudan30521), but did not file an appeal after having been sentenced to a judgment against the Defendant, and the said judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

On October 29, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for re-registration with the Defendant on the ground that it cannot be confirmed that the instant injury and disease was caused or aggravated by proximate causal relation with the performance of military duties, etc. after deliberation and resolution by the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement. On March 10, 2016, the Plaintiff rendered a non-conformity of the requirements for persons who rendered distinguished services to the State and persons eligible for veteran’s compensation (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] No dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff served as the Army Information and Communications Team’s Telecommunication in the Republic of Korea. After completing the military training on July 2012, 2012, the Plaintiff had been provided with preserved treatment from September 28, 2012 to December 4, 2012, but the pain continued, and the Plaintiff was diagnosed at a private hospital around March 2013, and was discharged from the hospital after being diagnosed with the instant injury. As such, the Plaintiff entered the hospital without any symptoms of the said injury, and the symptoms occur after entering the military, and even if the Plaintiff’s genetic test confirmed that the “HAB27”9 was trained, the Plaintiff’s genes had the said genes.

arrow