1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 24, 2007, the Plaintiff was discharged from military service on August 23, 201 with the maturity of August 23, 201, and served as the 7th Posium 663 Posium B-9 Autonomous Spos Team leader at the time of the occurrence of each of the claims by the Plaintiff as follows.

B. On August 8, 2013, the Plaintiff suffered respective differences in the number of signboards escape certificates (L4-5) (hereinafter “L4-5”) and the number of signboards escape certificates (L5-S1) (hereinafter “L5-S1”) while serving in the military, and filed an application for registration with the Defendant for distinguished service to the State on August 8, 2013.

C. On May 2, 2014, the Defendant: (a) determined that the disease from the disease suffered before the injury was considerably worse due to the performance of duties, education, and training not directly related to the national security, etc. during military service; (b) thus, constitutes the requirements for military personnel and police officers under the Act on Support for Persons Eligible for Veteran’s Compensation; (c) however, on the ground that the injury incurred in the performance of duties or education and training directly related to national security, etc. directly related to national security, security, etc., does not constitute the requirements for persons and police officers of distinguished services to the State under the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State”); and (d) the instant provision did not constitute the requirements for persons and persons eligible for veteran’s compensation on the ground that the proximate causal relation with

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff participated in the leisure training on February 2010 and performed his duties as the head of K-9 Autonomous S-9 team leader, while performing his duties, is different from K-9 Autonomous S-9 team leader (hereinafter “instant accident”).

The soldier was injured with severe injuries, but the discharge from active service was not more than one year, and was promoted and promoted.