logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.03.30 2016구단10049
국가유공자및보훈대상자요건비해당결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of disposition;

A. On January 6, 2014, the Plaintiff entered the Army confirmed the species of vertebrate at the National Armed Forces Dong-dong Hospital, around July 2014, and was discharged from the military service on November 17, 2014 after undergoing the crypt removal of species at the National Armed Forces Water Service Hospital, etc. on September 1, 2014. The disease was diagnosed as “the dyscopic pattern or the dyscopic scopic scopic scopic scopic (hereinafter “the instant dyscopic scopic”).

B. On August 11, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person who has rendered distinguished service to the State by asserting that he/she had been injured at He/she while moving a military unit during the Daejeon training, and that he/she was injured at He/she. As to this, on November 10, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision on the non-conformity of the requirements for persons who have rendered distinguished service to the State and persons eligible for veterans compensation on the ground that it is difficult to recognize the relationship between the instant wounds and the military performance of official duties

(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case"). 【No ground for recognition exists, Gap's 1 to 3, Gap's 7, and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. On April 2014, 2014, after the Plaintiff’s assertion was issued with pain or treatment without entering the military, the Plaintiff’s participation in the military, repeated the process of loading and unloading tools, stuffs, etc. necessary for repairing the vehicles into the front military, and the Plaintiff’s participation in the military, led to the difference in the instant case due to the Plaintiff’s sudden aggravation of treatment, as it resulted in the Plaintiff’s failure to undergo appropriate diagnosis and treatment, and the injury in the instant case resulted in the occurrence of the performance of duties or education and training directly related to the national defense and security or the protection of the people’s lives and property, or the occurrence of performance of official duties at least for the military.

arrow