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

A. On June 8, 1976, the Plaintiff was discharged from military service on March 11, 1982 when he was discharged from military service by entering the Army as Staff sergeant.

B. On June 25, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for registration of persons who rendered distinguished services to the State on the basis of the difference between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s “coin, breast, and head” (hereinafter “instant wounds”).

C. After deliberation and resolution by the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement, on December 4, 2014, the Defendant rendered a decision on the eligibility of persons who rendered distinguished services to the State and persons eligible for veteran’s compensation (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the difference between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff is not recognized as having caused proximate causal link with the performance of official duties, and thus, caused or aggravated.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul No. 1-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Defendant’s disposition of this case based on the following reasons: (a) while undergoing a harsh training and shocking case while serving in the Plaintiff’s alleged military service, and the instant wound was treated several times at the medical room, etc.; and (b) the instant wound was caused by the military service, and thus, it was not verified due to the military administration’s fault even though the injury was caused or aggravated due to the military service.

B. As to the instant case, comprehensively taking account of the evidence and the following circumstances acknowledged by the overall purport of the pleadings, including evidence of No. 3, evidence No. 3, evidence No. 3, evidence No. 4, and evidence No. 5-1 and No. 5-3 as to the instant case, the instant difference occurred due to the performance of duties or education and training directly related to the national defense, security, etc.

The defendant's disposition of this case is legitimate, since it is difficult to see that the proximate causal relation with the performance of duties or education and training has been caused or deteriorated beyond nature.

According to the fact-finding certificate related to the requirements of persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State (Evidence No. 3), the date of injury, the place of injury, the cause of injury, etc.