logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.10.17 2017구단71003
추가상병불승인처분취소
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. At around 17:50 on March 8, 2016, the Plaintiff, as the head of the Dong in Gwangju Northern-gu, was faced with a civil petitioner’s vehicle that was in progress at the front parking lot of the community service center (hereinafter “instant accident”).

B. After the instant accident, the Plaintiff received medical care in the line of official duty from March 9, 2016 to June 20, 2016. After the instant accident, the Plaintiff had undergone a close inspection conducted at C Hospital on June 28, 2016, the Plaintiff received diagnosis of the “Weat (Sek 12 - 1, 1, 1- 2)” (hereinafter “the instant additional disease”). On March 13, 2017, the Plaintiff applied for approval of the medical care for the instant additional disease to the Defendant on the following grounds: (a) the Plaintiff received a close inspection conducted at C Hospital on June 28, 2016.

C. However, on March 24, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition to not approve the Plaintiff’s application for approval of medical care for official duties (hereinafter “instant disposition”) in accordance with the Defendant’s advisory opinion that “it is difficult for the Plaintiff to develop a conical signboard by the crupte base, a wound-type, a wound-type, and the instant additional wound appears to be a sediment without causation with the instant accident” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

On June 15, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a request for review of the instant disposition with the Public Official Pension Benefit Review Committee.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4 (including satisfy number), Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant additional injury and disease occurred due to the instant accident, and there is a proximate causal relation between official duties and the instant additional injury and injury and thus, the Defendant’s disposition taken on a different premise is rendered.

arrow