logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.09.28 2017구단11119
국가유공자요건비해당결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff entered the Army on February 9, 2015 and was discharged from military service on November 25, 2015, and was discharged from military service on November 7, 2016, with respect to the Defendant on November 7, 2016, the Plaintiff suffered from the injury of knee-come-come, while suffering from geling a tree during ground collaborative training conducted from May 4, 2015 to May 9, 2015.

6. Daejeon training and evaluation conducted until May 201 and the same year from June 29, 2015;

7. 4. Until April 1, 200, the knee injury has deteriorated during the shooting training.

In addition, the applicant filed an application for registration of persons who rendered distinguished services to the State (hereinafter referred to as “instant wounds”).

B. On June 13, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the performance of duties or education and training directly related to the protection and security of the country from which the pertinent injury occurred, or the protection of the lives and property of the people, shall not be deemed to have been caused or deteriorated as a result of the performance of duties or education and training not directly related to the protection and security of other countries or the protection of the lives and property of the people” (hereinafter “each disposition of this case”) that does not meet the requirements for persons who rendered distinguished services to the State or persons eligible for veteran’s compensation.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2, Eul evidence Nos. 3 through 5, and 15, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. Even if the Plaintiff’s assertion was likely to cause damage to human beings compared to the general public by using knee-free knee-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free kne-free,

Therefore, it is necessary.

arrow