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 November 8, 2002, the Plaintiff was receiving treatment from the former North Korean University Hospital and the Police Hospital from May 22, 2003 due to symptoms that are not well-brupted for returning home while on duty as an auxiliary police officer. On July 4, 2003, the Korean Armed Forces Mine Hospital was diagnosed by the Maternal Symological Distress (hereinafter “the instant wounds”) and discharged from military service on August 11, 2003.

B. On October 21, 2003, the Plaintiff applied for the registration of the person who rendered distinguished service to the head of the next veterans branch. However, on January 19, 2004, the head of the next veterans branch rendered a decision on the non-applicable requirements for the person who rendered distinguished service to the State on the ground that the proximate causal relation between the Plaintiff’s military service and the instant wound cannot be acknowledged.

C. On October 22, 2007, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person who rendered distinguished service to the head of the next next veterans branch by supplementing relevant documents. However, on December 7, 2007, the head of the next veterans branch rendered a decision on non-conformity of the requirements for a person who rendered distinguished service to the State on the ground that the causal link between the instant wounds and the official duties cannot be recognized.

On March 27, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for registration of persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State, along with the details of health insurance benefits, physical appraisal statement, etc. However, on September 12, 2014, the Defendant rendered a decision that the instant wound does not meet the requirements for persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State and persons eligible for veteran’s compensation (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 4-1, 2, Eul evidence 1-1, 1-3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was subject to a physical grade 1 in a physical examination for the admission of the military forces due to the lack of force as well as physical disorder. However, the instant wound occurred due to excessive stress experienced in the course of performing duties, such as the suppression of excessive demonstrations, exposure of appointed soldiers to continuous noise, etc., so far.