2015 old-gu 20651 Action to revoke the revocation of a disability rating

A

The Commissioner of Busan Regional Veterans Administration

November 11, 2015

November 25, 2015

1. The Defendant’s disposition of determining a disability rating rendered to the Plaintiff on November 5, 2014 is revoked.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 24, 1993, the Plaintiff entered the Army and discharged the Plaintiff from active service on November 30, 1995.

B. On March 16, 1995, while serving in the military, the Plaintiff was walking the other party's altitude while walking in the process of Taekwondo team examination. Accordingly, the Plaintiff received a method of elimination of the altitude on the right side due to a high spating from the right side (hereinafter referred to as "first difference").

C. The Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State on March 24, 2010, and the Defendant was registered as a person of distinguished service to the State on June 29, 2010, by recognizing the relationship between the first and the first wounds on June 29, 2010 and granting judgment No. 703 in a physical examination for disability rating classification on July 27, 2010.

D. After that, on August 9, 2010, the Plaintiff filed an application for confirmation of additional major items with the Defendant to recognize the injury or diagnosis and treatment of the injury to the refund at the time of the first injury treatment on March 14, 2011, the Defendant did not verify the records of injury, diagnosis and treatment of the injury to the refund at the time of the first injury, and the Plaintiff’s inspection of the Busan University Hospital found Macro(GII), which led to the discovery of the Plaintiff as a result of the examination of the Busan University Hospital’s hospital’s failure to recognize additional measures on the ground that the proximate causal link between the second injury and the military duties is not recognized.

E. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an administrative litigation against the head of the Changwon Veterans Branch seeking the revocation of the above additional merit disposition requirements (the Changwon District Court 201Guhap1632), and won the case at the first instance trial. The Defendant revoked the above additional merit disposition requirements according to the recommendation of the adjudication division in accordance with the mediation recommendation of the adjudication division in the appellate trial (the Busan High Court 2013Nu16555), which was proceeding upon the Defendant’s appeal, and issued a disposition to recognize the Plaintiff as a person falling under Article 4(1)6 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State (hereinafter “the first and second differences in the case”).

F. Meanwhile, on November 5, 2014, the Defendant: (a) conducted a physical examination on the instant wound on November 5, 2014; (b) deemed that the Plaintiff constitutes “a person who has a high level of disability in the function of reproductive organs” on the grounds that the Plaintiff was recovered from the right-hand high refund and the Plaintiff was judged as a person with a high level of disability in the function of reproductive organs due to the left-hand situation; and (c) notified the Plaintiff of the results of the determination (hereinafter “instant disposition

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff recovers from the right-hand high-ranking from the first wound, and caused a disability that has lost its function as the refund to the left-hand side due to the second wound, and the degree of the wound in this case constitutes class 5202 set forth in the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State. Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case on different premise is unlawful

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) In addition to the provisions and purport of the above-related Acts and subordinate statutes, comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances that can be seen as the result of Gap evidence Nos. 5-1, 2, and 6-4, and Eul evidence Nos. 4, as well as the result of the physical examination commission and fact inquiry of the head of Busan National University Hospital in this court, the purport of the entire pleadings is as follows: the plaintiff suffered from the injury of this case which caused the loss of one high exchange and loss of the other high exchange function, and the degree of the injury of this case was the degree of the injury of this case,

It is reasonable to see that a person falls under class 5,202 of class 5 prescribed in attached Table 3.

① On March 16, 1995, the Plaintiff, while serving in the military, worked in the Taekwondo Team on March 16, 1995, was killed and wounded in the instant case while walking to the string of the other party, and was subject to the removal of the string right.

② Considering the fact-finding system inspection conducted in 2007 on the left-hand side, the Plaintiff is able to be pregnant if he/she attempts to make an inbound correction in a state in which natural pregnancy is impossible.

③ The appraiser of the Busan University Hospital who conducted the physical appraisal of the Plaintiff in the instant lawsuit presented his opinion that “the Plaintiff’s left-hand refund of the Plaintiff may be deemed to have lost its function in terms of the formation of sperm among the functions of metratization. In natural conditions, it is necessary to conduct surgery which is in need of heavy costs of artificial insemination because it is impossible to be pregnant. Such surgery also requires the spouse to undergo medical processes, such as raising eggs and ovum extraction, and even if pregnant, it cannot be deemed that it maintains the exhaustr function in consideration of the possibility of being pregnant.” This seems to be medically reasonable as a result of the physical appraisal of the Plaintiff.

④ In the course of the organization inspection of high exchange with the Plaintiff, at 9 points, Jhnsen’s score was turned out. However, this is difficult to say that the Plaintiff’s high refund on the left-hand left-hand side maintains the main function of this year solely on the ground that the Plaintiff’s high-class refund on the basis of the standard of determining disability details and its purport, etc. stipulated in attached Table 4-B of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State, is 9 points.

2) Therefore, the instant disposition that the Defendant decided to grade VI, which affected the Plaintiff’s disability rating due to the instant injury, was unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all participating Justices.

Judge Dok-do;

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.