1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 22, 1954, the Plaintiff entered the Army and received hospitalized treatment at the 116 Army Hospital on April 28, 1955, under the diagnosis of the “Cyunitis” at the 116 Army Center. On May 19, 1955, the Plaintiff was under the diagnosis of the “Cyun-si, Myun-si, Myun-si, Myun-si, Myun-si,” and was transferred to the 63 Army Hospital on July 23, 1955, and was discharged from military service on July 23, 195.

B. On January 23, 2014, the Plaintiff faced face with the Defendant in the pole during night training at the training center around February 1955 (hereinafter “instant accident”).

3) As to the instant injury and disease, the name of the Coordinate Department and the Do governor Do governor Do governor (hereinafter referred to as the “instant injury and disease”).

(ii) filed an application for registration of persons of distinguished service to the State, alleging that they occurred.

C. On August 7, 2014, the Defendant rendered a non-specific decision-making disposition on the requirements for persons who rendered distinguished services to the State and persons eligible for veteran’s compensation on the ground that the instant injury is not recognized as having caused proximate causal relation with military duties or education and training, in light of the following: (a) there is no specific and objective record to verify that the Plaintiff suffered serious wounds in performing military duties, such as the external trauma force on the beds, on the ground that the instant injury was not recognized as having been caused or aggravated by proximate causal relation with military duties or education and training.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, Eul Nos. 1, 3, 4, 9, 10, 14, and 15 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted 1: (a) entered the Gun in a state where there is no malfunction in both sides of the trial force; and (b) the instant accident occurred during night training on February 1955, resulting in a sudden decline in both sides of the disease; and (c) the instant injury was caused.

Therefore, the instant injury and disease is due to “performance of duties or education and training directly related to national defense and security or the protection of people’s lives and property” under Article 4(1)6 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State.