1. The Defendant’s disposition against the Plaintiff on June 18, 2013, which was non-conforming to the requirement of a person of distinguished service to the State, “the occurrence of ear noise in both sides.”

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 26, 1972, the Plaintiff was born, and was enrolled as a candidate for the Staff sergeant at the Army on August 26, 1972, and was retired from the military service as a sergeant on March 31, 2008 on March 31, 2008.

B. On September 21, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration with the Defendant for distinguished service to the State.

(A) The Plaintiff’s application and the Defendant’s disposition were made with respect to “An inverte of ear noise in both sides” and “vertebrate” but the Plaintiff’s “inverte of earing noise in both sides” (hereinafter “inverte of earing noise in both sides,” and limited to this) seeking revocation.

On June 18, 2013, the Defendant issued a disposition against the Plaintiff on the ground that “It is difficult to recognize that the applicant was suffering from military duties or education and training, which directly related to the national defense, or that the causal link with the military duties or education and training was caused or aggravated, on the ground that “It is difficult to recognize that the applicant was suffering from military duties or education and training, which are directly related to the national defense, or that there was a proximate causal link with the military duties or education and training” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 evidence, Eul 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. From 1973 to 1998, the Plaintiff asserted that he had been in charge of shooting-related duties, such as the chief of a team, the senior chief of a team, the senior chief of a team, the staff staff of operations, the shooting control officer, etc., and that an application for shooting-related duties occurred due to repeated shooting training.

Since there is a proximate causal relationship between military duties, education and training and application, the instant disposition is unlawful.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. The plaintiff 1 was recognized from 1973 to 1998 in the 28th group C.