logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.06.14 2017구합743
생계곤란병역감면거부처분취소및상근예비역입영처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On July 5, 2010, the Plaintiff was determined as Grade III and was subject to a disposition of enlistment in active duty service as a result of a draft physical examination conducted on July 5, 2010.

On September 1, 2011, the Plaintiff married on September 1, 201, and has two children (Cirs and D) between his spouse.

On December 2, 2013, the plaintiff applied for the selection of those to be called to full-time reserve service and was selected as those to be called to full-time reserve service.

As a result of the follow-up draft physical examination on November 5, 2015, the Plaintiff was determined as Grade 3 at the same physical grade as before and was subject to a disposition to be enlisted for active duty service again, and the enlistment was postponed due to the reasons for bringing up children.

On March 27, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for military service reduction or exemption with the Defendant on the ground of difficulty in maintaining his livelihood, alleging that such application constitutes “a person who is neither the principal nor his family’s livelihood” under Article 62(1)1 of the Military Service Act.

On June 30, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting the Plaintiff’s application for military service reduction or exemption on the ground that the Plaintiff does not fall under any of the grounds under Article 62(1)1 of the Military Service Act in light of the Plaintiff’s family’

(hereinafter “instant refusal disposition.” On July 5, 2017, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff on August 14, 2017 that he would be enlisted for the full time reserve service to the 17th Team of the Army.

(hereinafter “instant enlistment disposition”). / [Grounds for recognition] Gap’s evidence 1, 2, Eul’s evidence 1, 11, and 12, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is based on the following: (a) the Plaintiff liveds with his wife and children after marriage, and lived with his father and female father; (b) the Plaintiff’s father was declared bankrupt; (c) the Plaintiff’s mother is under individual rehabilitation procedures; (d) the Plaintiff’s parent and female mother did not provide economic support to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff’s wife, and their children; and (e) the Plaintiff’s father and female do not have any ability to provide economic support in the future.

arrow