(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.02.22 2018구단10731

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) 대구지방법원 2019.02.22 2018구단10731

국가유공자 및 보훈보상대상자 요건 비해당

Text

1. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 4, 1981, the Plaintiff entered the Navy, and was discharged from Korea on March 31, 2017, and was discharged from Korea on the ranked ranked ranked ranked ranked on March 31, 2017, and on April 24, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of persons of distinguished services to the State with the Defendant for registration as the applicant for the first ranked ranked ranked ranked ranked ranked on the left-hand ranked ranked ranked ranked ranked (hereinafter “instant second rank”).

B. In light of the records on March 21, 2018, the Defendant: (a) on the Plaintiff, “it is difficult to view that the 1, 2nd prize was caused by a sudden increase in the number of occasions; (b) the records of the instant case are not verified; (c) the records of diagnosis and treatment of an injury to the degree that the internal structure of the slots related to the military performance of official duties would be satisfed; and (d) the records of the medical treatment conducted on August 10, 2015, which was around 34 years after entering the military; (b) it is difficult to deem that the military performance of official duties led to a rapid aggravation in the progress of the military; and (c) unlike the general sergeant controlled 24 hours, it is difficult to recognize that there was a direct causal relationship between the 1 and 2nd prize of the instant case and the person who has rendered distinguished services to the State due to the delay in adequate diagnosis and treatment due to the military performance of duties, etc., and there is no evidence to prove that the status of the person subject to the duty of distinguished from the State’s.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff's assertion.

유사 판례

-서울행정법원 2017.11.03 2016구단63746

-부산지방법원 2017.05.17 2015구단21623

-광주고등법원 2017.04.20 2016누3948

-창원지방법원 2017.01.24 2015구합22538

-대구지방법원 2017.04.21 2016구단11303