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

A. On Nov. 26, 1964, the Plaintiff entered the Army and caused the commencement of works on Apr. 25, 1965 while serving in the Army, as the Plaintiff lost his own consciousness on Apr. 25, 1965. Moreover, the Plaintiff was discharged from military service on Aug. 31, 1966.

B. Around 2006, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for registration of a person of distinguished service for the reason that “the Plaintiff was treated at a military hospital due to a pre-explosion, but there was no record of special occurrence related to performance of official duties, and because it is difficult to recognize the occurrence of a general disease, it does not recognize the difference of application as a disease related to official duties.” However, the Defendant notified the Defendant of the decision on non-recognition of a person of distinguished service to the State on the ground that “the Plaintiff was treated at a military hospital due to a pre-explosion, leg, head, etc.”

3) The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal on December 12, 2006, but dismissed on December 12, 2006. (c) On November 7, 201, the Plaintiff filed a motion for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State on the ground that the Plaintiff, while serving in the Republic of Korea, was forced to bullying and bullying without any justifiable reason from higher-ranking soldiers, due to severe stress, and accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a motion for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State by stating that the Plaintiff had been forced to bullying and bullying during his/her service, and caused severe stress.

2) However, on June 4, 2012, following the deliberation and resolution of the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of a decision equivalent to a person who rendered distinguished services to the State (a person who rendered distinguished services to the State) on the ground that “the details of injury or disease related to the official duties can be verified, and objective supporting materials are not verified, and thus, they cannot be recognized as wounds in the official duties.” 3) Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant as Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2012Gudan15671, Jul. 5, 2012, seeking the revocation of the disposition against the Defendant on June 4, 2012.