logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2020.09.17 2020구단54619
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. On November 18, 1997, the Plaintiff entered the Army and was discharged from military service on January 17, 200 when serving at the headquarters of the three group of the two group of the two group of the two group of the three group of the specialized military manpower, and was discharged from military service on January 17, 200.

B. On May 4, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for registration of a person who has rendered distinguished services to the State regarding “the semi-monthly depression on the side of both sides”. The Defendant did not constitute a person who has rendered distinguished services to the State, but did not constitute a person who has rendered distinguished services to the State.

After that, the plaintiff was registered as a person eligible for veteran's compensation after the physical examination of grade 7 8122.

C. On December 28, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration with the Defendant for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State, asserting that “The two sides of the slives slives slives (hereinafter “the two sides”) should be recognized as a person of distinguished service to the State.” D) On December 6, 2019, the Defendant did not confirm the record that the Plaintiff suffered an injury due to a special external wound related to the performance of military duties, and it is difficult to deem that he/she suffered an injury due to a single individual case. However, on May 12, 1998, when entering the military, he/she was given medical treatment from May 12, 1998, where he/she was under the ordinary military service and received an surgery three times, it appears that he/she continued to have suffered an indirect damage on both sides and knenenene, which led to a sudden aggravation of the state’s progress, and it is difficult to view that there was a direct change in the details of this case or other matters of national security.

‘The disposition of this case' is called ‘the disposition of this case' for reasons of non-conformity of persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State.

A. [The fact that there is no dispute over the basis for recognition, the entries in Gap evidence 1, 8, and 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

arrow