Criteria for determining disability ratings under the Military Pension Act

Article 23 of the former Military Pension Act (Amended by Act No. 11632, Mar. 22, 2013); Article 47 [Attachment Table 2] of the former Enforcement Decree of the Military Pension Act (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 24643, Jun. 28, 2013);

Plaintiff (Law Firm Law, Attorneys Lee Byung-jin et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

The Minister of National Defense (Law Firm Corporation, Attorneys Gjin-o et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 2012Nu36752 decided June 20, 2013

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2

Article 23 of the former Military Pension Act (amended by Act No. 11632, Mar. 22, 2013) provides that a soldier shall be paid a wounded veterans' pension for each grade in cases where a soldier retires from office under the condition of disability due to a disease or injury caused by official duty, or where a soldier becomes disabled due to such disease or injury after retirement, a pension for wounds for each grade shall be determined by the Presidential Decree. Accordingly, Article 47 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Military Pension Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 24643, Jun. 28, 2013) classifys the disability rating under Article 23 of the former Military Pension Act according to [Attachment 2], but the criteria for determining the disability rating are not prescribed in the Enforcement Decree of the Military Pension Act or the Enforcement Rule of the Military Pension Act. The Ministry of National Defense, based on the foregoing provision, is not a person who assists in the performance of the affairs of the Ministry of National Defense, and it does not have any objective meaning or validity of the above Military Pension Act.

The court below interpreted that subparagraph 5 of class 6 may be recognized in accordance with the degree of underwater impairment caused by the qualitative impairment in spine due to the cryptic damage in spine, separately from the content of the Military Pension Act, the Military Pension Act and the Military Pension Act, and the provisions of the Enforcement Decree and the Enforcement Rules of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, taking into account not only the content of the above explanation about class 5 of class 6 of class 6 of the Military Pension Act, and determined that the Plaintiff falls under subparagraph 5 of class 6 of the Military Pension Act, on the ground that there was a serious disorder to the extent that it is difficult to crye even if the Plaintiff uses equipment due to the cryptic damage in spine, such as the cryptic damage in spine, as an injury

Examining the records in accordance with the above legal principles, the above determination by the court below is just, and there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles on the interpretation and application of the criteria for disability ratings.

2. As to the third ground for appeal

For the reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that there was an underwater functional disorder to the extent that the Plaintiff had difficulty in driving his arms even when using the gear.

Examining the record, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no violation of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules without all necessary deliberations.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Sang-hoon (Presiding Justice)