logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.12.21 2017누76977
공무상요양불승인처분 취소청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning the instant case is as follows, and the judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion is added under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for adding the judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article

2. At the end of the first instance judgment, the 1st 3rd malgos of the fourth 4th malgos of the first instance judgment were “sever under 0,000,” “28mHg” of the fifth malgos were “283mHg”, “one month” of the 6th 8th malgos were “a similar official duties”, and “the relevant official duties were not deemed to have been in charge of the relevant duties” in the seventh 3rd 7th malgos of the first instance judgment, “The F seems to have been in charge of the relevant duties,” so it appears to be “the 1st malgo 10 to 15m malgosym malgosym 7m malm malgosym malm 4, 10m malm mar malm mar 5m malm mar mar mar 1 (5m m m m g).

arrow