1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, ..

1. Following the confirmation of the judgment subject to a retrial is obvious or obvious in the records at this court. A) The Plaintiff, while serving in the military, was acute infection and continued to perform military service without proper medical treatment, which led to the aggravation of acute shock infection. After undergoing surgery, he/she was performing surgery, he/she shall have a genome color (hereinafter “instant wounds”).

(B) On February 22, 2012, the Defendant filed an application for the registration of a person who rendered distinguished service to the State with the assertion that the instant wound occurred with the Defendant, which was later than 20 years after discharge from active service, and that it is presumed to have been performed well without undue reason at the time of the operation on the acute hydropath infection that occurred during the military service. The medical point of view of the medical professional, it is stated that the Plaintiff’s status was improved in the military doctor’s past records and nursing records also indicate that the Plaintiff’s status was changed, and thus, the Plaintiff’s discharge from active service cannot be recognized as a proximate causal relation between the performance of military service and the performance of military service (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C) On October 30, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an administrative suit against the Defendant seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the District Court Decision 2012Gudan2939, which rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on August 25, 2014. (D) The Plaintiff appealed against this judgment and appealed as the court 2014Nu6922. On April 2, 2015, the said court rendered a judgment subject to a retrial to dismiss the Plaintiff’s appeal.

E. On June 19, 2015, the Plaintiff appealed to the judgment subject to a retrial, and filed a final appeal with Supreme Court Decision No. 2015Du1977, and on June 19, 2015, the final judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive.

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The plaintiff under Article 451 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act is the head of the current suffering in the litigation procedure for the case subject to a retrial.