1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff entered the Army on May 20, 1965 and was discharged from military service on January 13, 1968 after he participated in the Vietnam War from August 30, 1966 to December 4, 1967.

B. On August 12, 1996, the Plaintiff determined that “urine disease” was a patient suffering from defoliants as of July 5, 199, and as a result of a re-classification physical examination on February 2, 2009, the Plaintiff was determined to fall short of grading standards, and “urine disease” was determined to fall short of class standards, and “urine disease” was determined to fall short of class 7.202.

C. After that, on February 6, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of actual aftereffects of defoliants with respect to “heremic heart disease” and received physical examination on March 16, 2015.

On April 6, 2016, the Defendant: (a) against the Plaintiff, “hovascular heart disease” falls under class 7 category 51111 of the disability rating based on a narrow opinion corresponding to the cronology; and (b) “hurology” falls under class 7 grade 117 of the disability rating; and (c) “hurinology” falls under class 7 grade 117 of the final disability rating on the ground that the “hurin’s disease” falls short of the disability rating criteria; and (d) “the instant disposition”

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 8, 10, 11, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 7 (including each number, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply)

each entry, the purport of the whole pleading

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff’s “hovascular heart disease” falls under class 5108 of class 6, and at least class 7 of class 7, the instant disposition that applied class 7 class 511 to “hovas heart disease” and determined that “hovas disease” falls short of the grade standard is unlawful.

B. Relevant regulations 1) Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “Act on Persons of Distinguished

Article 6-5 (2) provides that persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State shall be deemed to have applied for a medical examination for re-determination on the date they applied for further recognition, and Article 6-4 of the same Act.