2016Guhap2038 Revocation of dismissal of application for payment of consolation money, etc.

A

The Minister of Government Administration

June 16, 2016

August 25, 2016

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The defendant's dismissal decision on July 24, 2015 against the plaintiff is revoked.

1. Details and details of the disposition;

A. B (the father of the Plaintiff) was forced to be mobilized to the mining center in the Republic of Korea on September 1943 by Japan on the basis of Japanese colonial rule and around October 1945, and died on December 15, 1982, 1982.

B. On July 6, 2005, the Committee for Inspection of the Truth of Forced Mobilization Damage under the Japanese colonial Rule decided B as the "victim of Force Mobilization under the Japanese colonial Rule pursuant to the Special Act on Inspection of the Truth of Forced Mobilization Damage under the Japanese colonial Rule (repealed by Act No. 10143, Mar. 22, 2010)."

C. On March 22, 2010, the administrative affairs of the committee to ascertain the truth of the mobilization of force under the Japanese colonial Rule were succeeded to the support committee for the victims, etc. of the mobilization of force during the period of the Japanese War (hereinafter referred to as the “Compulsory Mobilization Investigation Committee”) pursuant to Article 3(1) of the Addenda of the Special Act on Support for the Investigation into Force Forced Mobilization during the period of the Japanese War and for the Victims, etc. of the Mobilization of Forced Mobilization (hereinafter referred to as the “Compulsory Mobilization Investigation Committee”).

D. On June 24, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for consolation money under Article 4 of the Compulsory Mobilization Investigation Act with the compulsory mobilization investigation committee. On July 24, 2015, the compulsory mobilization investigation committee dismissed the application on the ground that “B is deemed to have been forced to be a worker under the Japanese system and returned to the Republic of Korea, but there is no ground to recognize the fact that it was damaged by an injury or disease during the period or during which it was returned to the Republic of Korea” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

E. As the period of existence of the Compulsory Mobilization Investigation Committee expired on December 31, 2015, the Defendant succeeded to its jurisdiction pursuant to Article 19(4) of the Compulsory Mobilization Investigation Act.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

B Inasmuch as Article 2 subparag. 3 (a) of the Compulsory Mobilization Investigation Act is a victim of forced mobilization of a foreign country, the disposition of this case otherwise determined is unlawful.

3. Determination

A. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

B. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

Article 2 subparag. 3 (a) and Article 4 subparag. 2 of the Compulsory Mobilization Investigation Act provide that "the consolation money shall be paid to a person who has suffered an injury due to an injury prescribed by Presidential Decree during the period from April 1, 1938 to August 15, 1945 (victim of forced mobilization in a foreign country) and forced mobilization abroad in accordance with the Japanese colonial rule." Article 2 subparag. 3 (a) and Article 4 subparag. 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Compulsory Mobilization Investigation Act provides that "an injury prescribed by Presidential Decree" means an injury that may cause permanent loss or decrease of labor force and a disease recognized by the subcommittee for the determination of a disability grade under Article 7 (1) subparag. 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the Compulsory Mobilization Investigation Act. A person who intends to receive consolation money must submit evidentiary materials verifying that he/she is a victim of forced mobilization in a foreign country pursuant to Article 27 (1) of the Compulsory Mobilization Investigation Act and Article 24 (1) subparag. 4 of the Enforcement Decree thereof.

However, the data submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Plaintiff sustained an injury during the period of compulsory mobilization overseas or during the period of returning to Korea, and thus, the instant disposition is lawful.

4. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit.

The presiding judge, senior judge;

Judges Gambling Residents

Judges Kim Gin-han

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.