1. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 23, 1989, the Plaintiff entered the Army and discharged the Army from active service on May 24, 1990.

B. On July 23, 1999, the Plaintiff applied for the registration of a person of distinguished service to the State on the ground that he was injured far from the mountain during the training conducted on August 1989, and passed the relevant resolution with respect to “Tatitis” diagnosed during military service on November 16, 199, but was judged below the grade standard on two occasions in the physical examination.

C. On April 1, 2015, the Plaintiff applied for the registration of a person who has rendered distinguished services to the State or a person eligible for veteran’s compensation, on the basis of the difference in the application for “protruding escape and pressure pressure table” (hereinafter “the instant difference”).

Accordingly, on October 1, 2015, the Defendant issued a notice of determination on the requirements for persons who have rendered distinguished service to the State and the requirements for persons eligible for veteran’s compensation (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the grounds that the causal link between the Plaintiff’s performance of official duties and the instant wounds cannot be recognized.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 5, Eul evidence 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff sustained an injury before the military training while serving in the military, caused the injury to the part of the military, and aggravated the injury, and therefore caused the injury to the present time, and thus, the injury in the instant case constitutes a person of distinguished service to the State, and the injury in the instant case constitutes a person eligible for veteran’s compensation.

B. “Direct cause relationship” required to be recognized as a soldier or policeman wounded on duty under Article 4(1)6 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State is insufficient simply by having a proximate causal relationship between the performance of duties or education and training. The main cause of the injury should be the performance of duties or education and training directly related to the protection and security of the State, or the protection of the lives

Meanwhile, Article 2 (1) 2 of the Act on Support for Persons Eligible for Veteran's Compensation.