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

A. On February 1951, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration with the Defendant for distinguished service to the State by alleging that he/she sustained an injury of “dubal damage, second damage, and brine” in the Changwon-gun of Gangseo-gu was killed in the Korean War, and applied for registration of a person who has rendered distinguished service to the State. On March 22, 2016 after deliberation and resolution by the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement, the Plaintiff was determined and notified that the Plaintiff was recognized as a person who has rendered distinguished service to the State (hereinafter “recognition”), and that the Plaintiff was recognized as a person who was killed and wounded in action under Article 4(1)4 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State (hereinafter “Act on the Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State”).

B. The Plaintiff received a physical examination at the Central Veterans Hospital for the determination of disability ratings, but was determined by the Central Veterans Hospital that the Plaintiff’s recognized disability ratings fall short of the Plaintiff’s recognized disability ratings. Since then, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a single physical examination and a second physical examination for the second physical examination, the Plaintiff received information from the Defendant that the Plaintiff was determined as non-applicable person of the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State because the Plaintiff’s recognized disability

C. On June 12, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for a re-verification physical examination with the Defendant. However, the Central Veterans Hospital was determined below the grading standard, based on the results of the said physical examination, and the Defendant rendered a guidance on the result of re-verification physical examination (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on October 18, 2017, following deliberation and resolution by the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 3 to 12 evidence, Eul's 1 to 6 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion constitutes a person of distinguished service to the State who was killed or wounded in action under Article 4(1)4 of the Act on Persons of Distinguished Service.