1. On November 23, 2016, part of the instant lawsuit revoking the disposition for persons who rendered distinguished services to the State and persons eligible for veteran’s compensation.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff entered the Republic of Korea on November 10, 1970 and was dispatched to South and North Korea on July 21, 1971 to December 3, 1972, and discharged from military service on September 20, 1973. On October 18, 1972, the Plaintiff stated that he was treated at a military hospital due to a traffic accident during his service and received treatment from the military hospital. On August 5, 2015, the Defendant recognized the part of the “surgical injury” as the requirement for the “surgical injury” as an application for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State.

B. However, as a result of a new physical examination conducted on January 6, 2016, the Plaintiff was determined to fall short of the disability rating standard, and received a disposition from the Defendant on June 2, 2016 falling short of the disability rating standard (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

(A) On October 19, 2016, the Plaintiff applied for a re-examination, but received a disposition below the grade criteria from the Defendant. (C)

On June 8, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for re-registration (in addition to an application) with the Defendant on the ground of the application for re-registration of the 3th upper frame, the right peltomitis, sykeitis, and sykeitis. The Defendant, following the deliberation of the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement, recognized the requirements of a soldier or policeman on duty as in the previous case. On the other hand, on November 23, 2016, with respect to the part of the right peltomitis, sykeitis, and sykeitis, the Plaintiff announced the Plaintiff on November 23, 2016 as a result of the deliberation of the requirements for additional prize application (hereinafter “non-relevant disposition”).

Accordingly, on January 10, 2017, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant non-grade disposition. On April 25, 2017, the Plaintiff added the claim for revocation of the instant non-grade disposition upon filing an application for modification of the purport of claim and the cause of claim.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Article 20(1) of the Administrative Litigation Act provides that the part of the instant lawsuit is lawful.