logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2017.02.15 2015구단1441
국가유공자요건비해당결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 21, 1978, the Plaintiff entered the Army and was on February 10, 1979, and was on active duty as a main officer at the headquarters B of the 35 Assistant Soldiers Group B, and was on active duty as a main officer from February 13, 2012 to February 17, 2012 (hereinafter “instant training”).

Since then, on March 12, 2012, the Plaintiff was diagnosed in the military hospital for the construction of a fresh of the balance pipe in the right 1 balance, and on February 8, 2013, the Plaintiff was diagnosed on the fresh of the gresh belt on both sides of the shoulder, damaged the gregnick belt and damaged the greging lines and damaged the detailed details (pregnite presumption). On March 11, 2013, the Plaintiff was discharged from military hospital on the upper right fregnite of the gregnish belt, and discharged from military service on the retirement age on June 30, 2013.

On October 30, 2013, the Plaintiff was discharged from the military hospital, and was discharged from the hospital, and was discharged from the hospital as a fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluorals

B. During the instant training, the Plaintiff was subject to the primary incidental training, and was faced with other soldiers in the ammunition, and had first been fluencing the shoulder. The Plaintiff installed a content under the training of the second combat commander, and was flucing up the second strings. During the string of the string of the strings, the Plaintiff met the 1 balance on the right side. As a result, the Plaintiff caused damage to the power line, revolving the strings, and the strings of the right side balance, and applied for registration of persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State and persons eligible for veteran’s compensation.

Accordingly, on August 25, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision that the Plaintiff does not constitute a soldier or policeman under the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “Act”) and the Act on the Support for Persons Eligible for Veteran’s Compensation (hereinafter “Act”), on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State on the ground that there is no proximate causal relation with the military’

arrow