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 was discharged from military service on March 5, 1955 after he was admitted to the Army on December 31, 1951.

B. On May 11, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration with the Defendant for registration of persons of distinguished service to the State on the ground that he/she suffered from the injury of “the center line and the left-hand eyebrow” during combat action. However, on August 8, 2012, the Defendant rendered a disposition to deny the registration of persons of distinguished service to the State on the ground that there was no objective evidence to acknowledge the injury incurred during combat action or in the performance of duties corresponding thereto, other

C. On May 9, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State on the ground that he/she sustained injuries during military service (hereinafter “the instant injuries”). On December 5, 2013, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition that “In addition to the Plaintiff’s statement, it is difficult to recognize the instant injuries as injury during combat or performing military duties because there is no specific and objective proof data to prove that the instant injuries were injured during combat or performing military duties,” among each of the instant injuries, “an injury between the unit eyebrow and the massage” did not fall under the requirements of soldier or policeman wounded in action, and “the front shoulder, the left-hand trees” does not fall under the requirements of soldier or policeman wounded in action, and “the front left-hand trees” does not fall under the requirements of soldier or policeman wounded in action.

On May 20, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the above disposition. However, on May 20, 2014, the said appeal was dismissed by the Administrative Appeals Commission.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1, 2, 4, Eul 1, 2, and Eul 1, 2, and Eul 3 respectively, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) On May 1952, 1952, while serving as the guard of a medical hospital for prisoners of war, the Plaintiff sustained an injury from the left-hand shouldered shouldered to the U.S. soldiers. 2) The Plaintiff was on August 8, 1952 while serving as the guard of a medical hospital for prisoners of war.