2010Gudan10856 Revocation of Disposition Rejecting Persons of Distinguished Service to the State

A

The Head of Seoul Regional Veterans Administration

2011,9.5

October 10, 2011

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The defendant's disposition of refusal to render distinguished services to the plaintiff on March 19, 2010 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

○ On October 12, 1990, entered the Army as a short-term private soldier (defense soldier) and discharged from military service on May 12, 1992.

○ On February 1, 1991, at the Hospital B, conduct re-afforesting on the left-hand slive structure and re-afluoring on the left-hand slive part of the external structure and re-afluoring on the

○ Medical Examination at B Hospital on October 21, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as “the injury or disease in this case”) on the part of the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Family Affairs (hereinafter referred to as “the injury or disease in this case”).

○ Disposition of Refusal to Support Persons of Distinguished Service to the State on March 19, 2010 on the ground of the instant injury or disease on December 17, 2009 (hereinafter “instant Disposition”).

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff, at around January 1, 1991, 200 g, 30 minutes or more, knenee, knee, knee, and knee knee were repeated, and left the hospital at the same time, but at the same time, the Plaintiff did not provide medical treatment on the ground of short-term illness in the unit, and was under operation at B at its own expense. After 24 weeks, the Plaintiff submitted a diagnosis certificate to the commander of the unit, which requires medical care and rehabilitation, but did not obtain approval, provided that he was to commute to the workplace for 2 months. After that, on August 191, 191, the Plaintiff got off knee-knee-knee-knee-knee-knee-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kn.

In light of the above circumstances, the instant disposition is unfair since the instant injury or disease was caused by training during military service or significantly aggravated due to such training.

(b) Medical opinions, etc.;

1) In filing an application for registration of the instant person, the Plaintiff stated that “When performing an operation from the military officer in charge of the military service at the time of the physical examination in 1989, the first military officer rendered a judgment of Grade 5, but received a final comprehensive judgment of Grade 4 in the final judgment. If the Plaintiff received an operation due to aggravation of the status after entering the hospital, and received an application for a temporary agenda at the time of the physical examination, the Plaintiff was exempted from Grade 5, but it was difficult to receive an operation after entering the hospital,” and stated that “The Plaintiff was returned on the ground that it was difficult to receive an operation after entering the hospital.”

2) The Plaintiff’s military fellow C and D submitted to this court a written confirmation that they observed the same content as the Plaintiff’s assertion.

3) Results of the commission of appraisal of medical records to the head of the E Hospital in this Court

① Plaintiff’s application

- The Plaintiff seems to have aggravated the progress of damage caused by training and credit after enlistment while being accompanied by opinions that undermine the stability of kneee, with the opinion of above the left-hand knee-man before enlistment. It is highly likely that the progress of continuous training, excessive training, iceing, etc. has deteriorated.

- The injury or disease of this case has a causal relationship with the injury or disease at the time of operation.

(2) Application by the defendant

- On January 29, 191, the Plaintiff was hospitalized as a main symptoms the limitation on sports accompanied by the fluences of the left slots, and was performed on February 1, 1991 under the diagnosis of the overseas unstable and the fluences of the fluences. The medical records for the right-hand slots are not confirmed.

- According to the medical records of the B Hospital, although there is a statement "the Switzerland prize before the three-year period," it is not possible to check the degree of specific unstableness or the diagnosis of damaged parts.

- The Plaintiff appears to have aggravated or additional damage after entering the 1990 knee-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-kne-k

- With respect to the left-hand slots, the unstableness after the operation in 1991 or the treatment has been completed, but it can be seen that they were re-exploded, therefore, the status in 2009 has a causal relationship with the diagnosis and operation in 191, the military service.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 6, Eul evidence No. 1 to 6, the result of this court's entrustment of examination of medical records to E hospital heads, the purport of the whole pleadings

C. Determination

In order to constitute "an injury during education and training or in the performance of duties (including illness in the line of duty)" under Article 4 (1) 6 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State, there should be a proximate causal relation between education and training, performance of duties, and injury or disease, and whether there is a substantial relation with the person shall be proved by

First of all, according to the above facts of recognition, it is clear that there was a lux on the left-hand knee of the plaintiff before entering the school, and its degree is that it fell under class 4 or 5 or that it was required to perform an operation in the physical examination for conscription.

On the other hand, there is no objective evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff sustained injuries on knee-de, as alleged by C and D, while serving in the military at around January 1991 or around August 1, 191. Moreover, there is no evidence to clarify why the Plaintiff complained of the wnee fe-decul, the short-term soldier commuting to commute to and from work, was hospitalized in B in the hospital by asking for the wnee feb, the left side of January 29, 191, and why is why is why the Plaintiff was hospitalized in B hospital by failing to undergo medical treatment and surgery within the armed forces, and without obtaining the recognition of the fegrat from the commander of a unit after the surgery, the Plaintiff has to go to and from the hospital for two months.

Furthermore, the above medical record appraisal commission diagnosed that there was causation between the operation in 191 and the present symptoms after the operation in 191 and the completion of the treatment. However, as long as it is obvious that the occurrence of the injury or disease in this case was involved in the factors belonging to the plaintiff's private life during the long period of 20 years, it is difficult to view the occurrence of the injury or disease in this case only as the result of after the operation in 1991, as long as it is obvious that the plaintiff participated in the factors belonging to the plaintiff's private life during the long period of 20 years.

Ultimately, comprehensively taking account of such circumstances, it is difficult to accept the Plaintiff’s assertion on the background of the instant injury and the causal relationship.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is without merit and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Yong-sik