logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.01.16 2013누19242
국가유공가요건비해당결정취소
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The requirements that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on August 8, 2012 are met for persons of distinguished service to the State.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 20, 200, while entering the Army and serving in the Korean Army D branch of the sixth Group D, the Plaintiff received hospitalized treatment under the diagnosis of “other non-human mental disorder” at the Armed Forces Dong Hospital and the Armed Forces Pream Hospital from March 17, 2001 to August 2, 2001.

After that, the plaintiff was discharged from active service on February 19, 2002 when he was under outpatient treatment.

B. On February 9, 2012, the Plaintiff asserted to the Defendant that “a mental fission certificate (hereinafter “the instant injury and disease”) occurred due to the cryption and ice of an appointed soldier during military service,” and filed an application for registration of persons who rendered distinguished services to the State.”

C. On July 24, 2012, the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement rendered a decision on whether the instant injury was caused or aggravated due to military service in consideration of the following: “Generally, mental illness is difficult to recognize the recognition of a person of distinguished service when the injury was caused without external wounds, such as injury to two parts; it is not verified specific and objective evidence that the person of distinguished service was subject to particularly excessive duties or stress to the extent that it was unable to be reduced compared to the dynamics; although the Plaintiff was related to the other case, the fact that the Plaintiff was recorded as not the other victim; however, it is not recognized that the disease was caused or aggravated due to military service.”

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion did not have any mental disorder before entering the military. Since the instant wound occurred due to extreme mental stress caused by closed military life after entering the military, ice ice, etc., the instant wound occurred on different premise.

arrow