logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.12.20 2015구합996
고엽제휴유의증환자 외처분결정취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff was admitted to the Army on March 22, 1966 and was discharged from military service on June 30, 1974 from the first patrol officer on February 2, 1972 to the second patrol officer on December 12, 1972.

B. On April 6, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of potential aftereffects of defoliants with the Defendant on the ground that the Vietnam War was exposed to defoliants during the Vietnam War.

C. On June 19, 2015, the Defendant decided on June 19, 2015 to the Plaintiff on the ground that “The disease(s) requested by the Plaintiff as a result of the examination by the Busan Veterans Hospital falls under potential aftereffects of defoliants, but the degree of disability falls short of the degree of disability.”

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”) (hereinafter “Disposition in this case”) is without dispute; Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul evidence Nos. 1, 6, and 7; the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion not only stated that the Plaintiff’s medical record submitted by the Plaintiff at the time of filing an application for registration of potential aftereffects of defoliants, but also stated that the salute and the red team’s salute and the salute were repeated on the part of the Plaintiff, and that the salute were limited to the salute of the instant difference even if the fact that the salute was conducted on

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case, which judged the falling short of the grade standard, is unlawful.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. Fact-finding 1) The Plaintiff’s medical record 7-8 years prior to the Plaintiff’s 7-8 year ago, and the scarcity and the red team repeatedly applied to the upper part of the ship, etc., with a view to identifying the exact diagnosis, the Plaintiff’s examination records of the Busan Veterans Hospital on May 8, 2015, and the result of the inquiry and reply to the head of the Busan Veterans Hospital on the part of the ship, and the result of this court’s inquiry and reply to the head of the Busan Veterans Hospital. At the time of the examination, the examination is limited to the inside, that is, the chest and the head of the relevant scarlet are recognized.

arrow