logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.11.19 2014구단62
국가유공자등록거부처분취소
Text

1. The Defendant’s disposition of refusal of registration of a person who rendered distinguished services to the State on November 14, 2013 is revoked.

2...

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff’s son B (hereinafter “the deceased”) entered the Gun on December 1, 2008.

B. The Deceased completed the education and training for six weeks after entering the National University on January 10, 2009, and completed the 4-day training for agreed Bombies at the General Military School on January 10, 2009.

2. The same year while he/she has been placed in the Army Command C, and has been on duty.

5. 21. A person who was hospitalized in the Daejeon Armed Forces Hospital on Duty;

6. 11. The same year in which he/she was discharged and on duty;

7. 2. Re-hospitalize the Armed Forces Daejeon Hospital, and died on October 1 of the same year.

C. On February 21, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that the deceased was suffering from a malicious forest species during his service as a coal agreement volunteer (hereinafter “instant wound”) and filed an application for registration with the Defendant for distinguished service to the State.

On October 23 of the same year, the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement did not correspond to the deceased under the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “the Act”), but deliberated and decided as falling under the “accidents of Disaster Death” under [Attachment 1] subparagraph 14 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Support for Persons Eligible for Veteran’s Compensation, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff on November 14 of the same year as eligible for veteran’s compensation.

(hereinafter “Disposition of this case”). 【The ground for recognition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s No. 6-1, 2, and No. 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was healthy before entering the Gun, but the instant difference occurred while serving as a coal agreement guard belonging to C (Ministry of National Defense No. 40) who is classified as a harmful military environment workplace under the Occupational Safety and Health Act and the Military Working Environment Management Regulations (Ministry of National Defense Directive No. 40) and was in charge of the removal of melting, re-fluoring, re-ramping, re-ramping, etc. of ammunition, and the same year.

5.21. The Armed Forces Hospital at the time of his official duty.

arrow