beta
Text
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 30, 2008, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State with the name of disease on April 30, 2008, stating that “A person who was suffering from injury on the drum in which defoliants was affected by a strong face staticly, while helicopter was influoring a helicopter, and suffered injury on the drum in which defoliants was affected,” and that “A person who was transferred to a hospital for medical treatment was killed and wounded on the right shoulder as his/her vehicle was recovered.”
B. On December 5, 2008, the Defendant: (a) on the Plaintiff on December 5, 2008, acknowledged that the satis and the bones of the satis were different in relation to official duties on the ground that “the satise and the bones of the satise are deemed to have been injured in relation to official duties, but it is difficult to recognize the satis and the bones injury as a combat-related wound due to lack of objective supporting materials; (b) however, the satis and the
C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the revocation of the above disposition rejecting the recognition of part of the wounded wife as Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2009Gudan8178. On November 27, 2009, the above court rendered a judgment that “the Defendant revoked the disposition rejecting the recognition of part of the wounded wife against the Plaintiff on December 5, 2008,” and the Defendant’s appeal and appeal were all dismissed (Seoul High Court Decision 2009Nu41235, Jul. 1, 2010; Supreme Court Decision 2010Du15377, Nov. 25, 2010).
(hereinafter referred to as “the judgment recognizing the injury of this case”) D.
Since then, after deliberation and resolution by the Board of Patriots and Veterans Affairs on January 31, 2011, the Defendant recognized “11 damage by maliciousia, 11 damage by the left-hand side of the Haakakak, and injury by injury in battles,” and “the Dok-in, Dok-in,” as an injury during battles, and recognized the Plaintiff’s “the Dok-in, Dok-in,” as an injury during battles, Article 4(1)4 and 6 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment of and Support for Persons, etc. of Distinguished