1. The decision to dismiss the payment of consolation benefits made by the Defendant to the Plaintiff on April 30, 2015 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. On June 24, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) the head of Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, who was delegated by the Defendant to receive an application for the payment of consolation benefits from the Defendant, applied for the payment of consolation benefits to the head of Gwanak-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Office (“Seoul”) by the Plaintiff’s father B (the father of the Plaintiff born and died on August 19, 197; hereinafter “the deceased”) for compulsory mobilization in the old calendar; and (b) thereby constituting a victim of forced mobilization in foreign countries. In so doing, the Plaintiff filed an application for the payment of consolation benefits pursuant to Article 27(1) of the Special Act on the Investigation into Force Forced Mobilization and Support for Victims, etc. of

On April 30, 2015, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for consolation money on the ground that “The fact that the deceased was mobilized by Japan from around 1942 to 1945 and returned to Korea was recognized as having been forced to work as an employee at the workplace in South-do, but there is no ground to recognize the fact that the deceased was disabled due to an injury during the compulsory mobilization period or during the process of returning to Korea.”

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Gap evidence 4-1, 2, Gap evidence 5, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In around 1942, the Plaintiff’s assertion was mobilized by Japanese colonial system and forced labor in the workplace located in Southyang-do, and was evacuated by the air defense. The Plaintiff suffered obstacles that could not cover the loss due to the width.

Therefore, the Appellant constitutes “a case where a person was disabled due to forced mobilization in a foreign country” under Article 4 subparag. 2 of the Act.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. According to Article 2 subparag. 3 (a) of the Act and Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Special Act on the Investigation into Force Forced Mobilization during the Time of the World War and Support for Victims of Mobilization of Foreign Force, etc. (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree”), it shall be based on a Japanese system between April 1, 1938 and August 15, 1945.