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 May 11, 2010, the Plaintiff entered the Army and was discharged from military service on June 8, 201. On June 21, 2011, the Defendant applied for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State on the ground that it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relation between wounds and military service after deliberation by the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement, and the Defendant rendered a non-competent disposition on January 12, 2012. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal, but was dismissed on July 17, 2012.

B. On November 7, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for registration of persons who rendered distinguished services to the State on the grounds that there is no evidence to acknowledge proximate causal relationship between the instant wounds and the military duties on the grounds that there was no evidence to acknowledge the causal relationship between the instant wounds and the military duties of the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). / [Grounds for recognition] Gap’s 1, 2, and 3, and Eul’s 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. From May 15, 2010 after entering the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff began to have repeatedly moved in the course of undergoing the basic military training for five weeks at the New Disease Education Team without any celbow joints, and there was symptoms that do not have been felbowed by being trained after being placed in the hospital, and the symptoms have gradually deteriorated and eventually led to the aggravation of the symptoms that make it impossible to use the company. Accordingly, the difference in the instant case is deemed to have been caused by the military performance of its duties, or has deteriorated at a level above the natural progress, and thus, the Plaintiff should be recognized as a person of distinguished service to the State.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. The Plaintiff’s medical opinion (1) is difficult to determine whether the Plaintiff was the first, second, and second, around July 2010, after approximately two months from the date of entering the military.