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 February 12, 1983, the deceased B (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) served as a soldier after being in charge of the work as a staff member, and died of the respiratory part due to the crypology of human cancer on April 3, 2013.

B. The Plaintiff, the deceased’s spouse, asserted that there was an climbam and climfe cream (hereinafter “instant wounds”) caused the death due to the work performed by the deceased, stress, and the working environment exposed to harmful substances, and filed an application for registration of persons of distinguished service to the State with the Defendant.

On August 13, 2013, the Defendant rendered a decision on the basis that the causal relationship between the instant wound and the performance of official duties is not recognized (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 6 evidence, Eul evidence 1 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that there was no circumstance that human cancer, etc. had occurred before being admitted. The Plaintiff’s assertion was exposed to cancer, such as asbestos and fine dust, at various construction sites while serving as an official disease, and was removed from the former administrative diffusion officer and performing overtime work, and the instant wound occurred due to stress. Thus, the instant disposition based on the premise that there was no proximate causal relation between the instant wound and the performance of official duties is unlawful.

B. (1) Determination refers to the injury or disease of a soldier or police officer during education and training or in the performance of duty (including illness in the line of duty) under Article 4(1)6 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State.

Therefore, in order to be the difference set forth in the above provision, there should be a proximate causal relationship between education and training or performance of duty and the injury and disease, and the causal relationship between the duty, etc. and the injury and disease.