1. The part concerning the conjunctive claim in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's conjunctive claim is dismissed.

3...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 3, 1954, the plaintiff was enrolled in the Army and graduated from the Army Military Police Academy for the Army, and served as a military police sergeant, and discharged from military service on October 15, 1958.

B. On June 25, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration with the Defendant for registration of persons who rendered distinguished services to the State by asserting that “the left-hand fall in a train due to an accident that goes beyond the train under the influence of the wound during the performance of official duties of the military” (hereinafter “instant wounds”), claiming that “the left-hand fall in the train,” and filed for registration of persons who rendered distinguished services to the State.

C. Accordingly, on January 23, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-specific determination on the requirements for persons who rendered distinguished services to the State and persons eligible for veteran’s compensation (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “the instant difference is not deemed to have proximate causal relation with the military performance of official duties, and constitutes the difference arising from gross negligence in the operational train without any inevitable reason.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 4, Eul evidence 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff asserted that he worked as a military police officer at the time of military service. On January 1, 1957, the plaintiff suffered from the difference in this case due to damage of 1,2,3 satisfactions on the very left left side of the train, which had been driven by a train in Busan for the purpose of controlling and patroling illegal forest products in the state that the left side of the train was entirely affected by the disaster.

Therefore, even if there is a proximate causal relation between the instant injury and the military performance, the Defendant’s disposition of this case, based on the different premise, is unlawful.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant statutes;

C. Determination 1) Article 4(1)6 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State (hereinafter “the Act”) (the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service