logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.05.22 2015구합943
위로금등지급신청기각결정취소
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff’s father He (the date of death report: March 10, 1970; hereinafter “the deceased”) was forced from April 194 to September 194 to be mobilized as a worker in the Austria area in Japan on a daily basis, and died after he returned from September 1945.

B. On June 9, 2011, the Defendant determined the Deceased as a victim of forced mobilization during the period of a Japanese-Japan dispute pursuant to Article 26 of the Special Act on Assistance to the Force Mobilization Investigation and Mobilization Victims, Etc. (hereinafter “Special Act”), and paid KRW 3 million to the Plaintiff A, the head of the deceased, who is the head of the deceased, on August 14, 2013.

C. On May 21, 2014, the Plaintiffs asserted that the deceased constituted a victim of outstanding amount under Article 2 subparag. 5 of the Special Act, and applied for the payment of the outstanding amount under Article 5 of the Special Act.

However, on October 16, 2014, the Defendant dismissed the application of Article 22 of the Special Act by applying Article 24 subparagraph 1 of the Special Act, instead of dismissing the application of the Plaintiffs on the ground that it is not a victim under Article 24 subparagraph 5 of the Special Act (where it is evident that the details of the report or application are not true or there is no objective evidence that it is true that the report or application is not true).

was held.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition” . [Grounds for recognition] The plaintiff A and the defendant: Evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the remaining plaintiffs as set forth in Evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and the defendant: The facts that no dispute exists between the plaintiff and the defendant; and the remaining plaintiffs Eul Nos. 1 through 7 were not present on the date for pleading, and they did not submit Evidence Nos. 1 through 5.

each entry, the purport of the whole pleading

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiffs' assertion is a special law for the deceased.

arrow