(영문) 광주고등법원 2015.11.05 2015누5800 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주고등법원 2015.11.05 2015누5800

국가유공자 및 보훈보상대상자 요건 비해당결정처분취소청구

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 27, 200, the Plaintiff entered the Army and discharged from military service on May 18, 2001. On September 27, 2001, the Plaintiff filed an application for the registration of a person of distinguished service to the State with the Defendant, stating that “On January 7, 2001, the Plaintiff fells on the wind where a disguised drum was snowed (hereinafter “the instant accident”) and falls on the wind, and left arms (hereinafter “the instant accident”). However, on December 11, 2001, the Board of Patriots and Veterans rendered a decision on December 201, 200 that “It is difficult to recognize proximate causal relation or aggravation between the occurrence or aggravation of official duties of the instant unit,” and that the Defendant rendered a disposition against the Plaintiff as to the pertinent person of distinguished service to the State.”

B. On July 29, 2013, the Plaintiff applied for the registration of a person of distinguished service to the Defendant on the ground as above. However, on January 15, 2014, the Defendant rendered a decision on the non-conformity of the requirements for persons of distinguished service to the State and persons of distinguished service to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that there was a medical opinion by a medical specialist that it is unreasonable to recognize the Plaintiff as being worse rapidly even if there was symptoms that occurred after the Plaintiff’s first medical treatment, and that there was no objective change in circumstances to reverse the already deliberated decision.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was not only before entering the instant case but also after entering the same, but also before the occurrence of the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s assertion completely obstructs the Plaintiff’s daily life due to the natural therapy.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2015.06.04 2014구단239

-의정부지방법원 2018.01.31 2016구단5523

-광주지방법원 2016.10.13 2014구단10335

-광주지방법원 2017.05.18 2015구단618

-서울고등법원 2015.09.25 2015누33327