logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.04.18 2015구단101094
국가유공자요건비해당결정취소
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. B entered the Army on February 12, 2013, and was placed at the 3rd Army Support Headquarters C on March 25, 2013, and was discharged from military service on November 11, 2014.

B. B, during the military service from March 25, 2013 to March 2014, 2014, was in charge of laundrying various laundrys, from November 2013 to June 2014, and from January 2014 to July 2014, B was in charge of laundrying duties.

C. On August 1, 2014, B was diagnosed as an acute tymal tymosis at the National Armed Forces Water Service Hospital (hereinafter “the instant injury and disease”), and died on June 19, 2015 while receiving treatment at the National Armed Forces Water Service Integrated Hospital, D Hospital, etc.

(hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”). D.

On July 21, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person of distinguished service to the Defendant on the ground that the instant injury or disease was caused by the State’s defense security or the performance of duties or education and training directly related to the people’s life and property. On November 6, 2015, the Defendant did not verify objective evidence that the instant injury or disease was caused by the Plaintiff’s performance of duties or education and training directly related to the State’s defense security or the people’s life and property. However, on the ground that it falls under the requirements for the persons of distinguished service to the State under the Act on Support for Persons Eligible for Veteran’s Compensation, the Plaintiff determined that the person of distinguished service to the State was ineligible for the status of a person of distinguished

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 6-1 through 12, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the deceased, while performing laundry work while serving in the military, was exposed to the synthetic taxation for clothes containing cancer (benents) and harmful substances, and instructed two copies. In addition to the operation of laundry machines, the deceased’s position is heavy.

arrow