1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 11, 200, the Plaintiff entered the Army and was performing combat sports activities on or around June 2000, and was diagnosed with the right-hand knene, and was discharged from military service on September 23, 200 after he was diagnosed with the anti-monthly fene in the Masle father (hereinafter “instant wounds”).

B. On October 20, 200, the Plaintiff was recognized as having been discharged from military service or retired from military service by suffering from wounds in education and training or in the performance of duty (including diseases in official duties), but on May 18, 2001 and July 23, 2001, the Plaintiff was determined to have failed to meet the rating criteria for new physical examinations conducted by the Busan Veterans Hospital, and was not registered as a person of distinguished service to the State.

C. On June 3, 2005, the Plaintiff applied for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State again due to the instant wound, received a physical examination for re-verification at the Busan Veterans Hospital on July 15, 2005, but failed to be registered as a person of distinguished service to the State after being judged below the grade criteria.

On September 29, 2014, the Plaintiff again filed an application for registration of a person who has rendered distinguished service to the State (hereinafter “instant application”). On December 22, 2014, the Defendant rendered a decision that the Plaintiff does not constitute the requirements for registration of a person who has rendered distinguished service to the State on the ground that “the instant injury did not occur due to “the performance of duties or education and training directly related to national defense and security, or to the protection of people’s lives and property” as prescribed in Article 4(1)6 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State” (hereinafter “the instant disposition”) but the Plaintiff did not constitute “the requirements for registration of a person who has rendered distinguished service to the State”).