1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. B, the spouse of the Plaintiff, entered the Korean War on February 9, 1952 and participated in the Korean War on April 22, 1953, and died on March 4, 2007.

B. On November 11, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of bereaved family members of a person who rendered distinguished services to the State with respect to the Defendant, asserting that he/she was discharged from military service by suffering injuries on the lower half and left arms while the deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”) was participating in the Dourisan Public Security Operation at the time of the Korean War.

C. Accordingly, on April 30, 2014, the Defendant: (a) received treatment from the Plaintiff on the part of the decedent’s beds as “patch infections and chatitis”; (b) on the part of the decedent’s beds, the Defendant did not recognize the disease cured without any special physical handicap as constituting the requirements for soldiers and police officers, police officers, and police officers; and (c) on the ground that there was no objective proof that the decedent suffered the above wounds during combat action or during the performance of duties corresponding to it, the Defendant notified the deceased of the determination of non-conformity of the requirements for persons of distinguished service to the State and persons of distinguished service to the State (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1-3 evidence, Eul's 1-3 evidence, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the deceased participated in the Korean War and supplied food and medicine during the Dogsan Public Security Operation was infected by parasitic shocks by using wild fauna and flora as food materials while conducting long-term operations. In addition, each of the aforementioned wounds was inflicted on the left arms and legs after being attacked by the attack during the said operations. As such, each of the wounds is included in the war or in the performance of duties corresponding to it.

Therefore, the Defendant’s disposition of this case is unlawful on a different premise.

(b) Article 4(1)6 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State.