1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 16, 1994, the Plaintiff entered the Army and discharged him from military service on February 10, 200.

On February 15, 1996, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as a hydro-nuclear escape certificate No. 4-5 of the 1996, and hospitalized at the Armed Forces Mine Hospital on February 15, 1996, and was discharged on June 11, 1996, after receiving physical treatment. At the time of discharge, the final diagnosis name “No. 4-5 of the 1999” was “the 4-5 nunule.”

B. On January 10, 2007, the Plaintiff applied for registration of a person who has rendered distinguished service to the Defendant on the ground that he was wounded, and around March 15, 2007, the Plaintiff determined that “galp galle No. 4-5” constituted the requirements for persons who have rendered distinguished service to the State. However, in the subsequent physical examination conducted thereafter, the application for registration of a person who has rendered distinguished service to the State was dismissed.

C. On May 2, 2013, the Plaintiff filed to the Defendant an application for registration of persons who rendered distinguished services to the State for the escape card No. 4-5 on the right side of the State (hereinafter “instant wounds”).

On November 13, 2013, the Defendant rendered a non-applicable disposition for the requirements of persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State and persons eligible for veteran's compensation (hereinafter "the instant disposition") to the Plaintiff on November 13, 2013, according to the results of the Veterans Examination Committee's deliberation, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have caused a clear external wound in the course of performing military duties, or to have caused a sudden increase in military duties as a direct cause. The Defendant cannot be deemed to have caused a sudden aggravation in the course of performing military duties.

The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the instant disposition without going through the previous trial procedure.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1-1, 1-2, and Eul 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's summary of the plaintiff's assertion was caused by the accident of this case while being trained by the large-scale force around August 1995.