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 December 29, 1967, the Plaintiff entered the Army and served in Vietnam from May 20, 1969 to August 14, 197, and was discharged from military service on November 14, 1970.

B. On March 29, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person who rendered distinguished services to the State or a person eligible for veteran’s compensation with different applications for the aggravation of the left-hand bucks and the aggravation of the engine’s land due to frequent battles that caused bucks to the left-hand bridge (buckbucks) in the course of performing military operations and led to the aggravation of bucks, etc.

C. On July 23, 2013, the Defendant rendered a decision on the Plaintiff’s non-conformity with the requirements of a person who rendered distinguished service to the State and the requirements of a person eligible for veteran’s compensation (hereinafter “instant disposition”). D.

On August 27, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on February 4, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 and 2, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was dispatched to South and North Korea, and then bombed on the left side of the bridge in the course of conducting operations on around 1970, and then was affected by post-treatment. In the course of conducting operations at least 30 days at one time, the Plaintiff’s disease in the waste and the engine area has been seriously damaged and deteriorated due to the smoke of harmful powders, scattering dust and excessive moisture, thereby suffering from pulmonary damage and expansion of the engine.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case based on a different premise is unlawful, even though the disease of the plaintiff's left-hand left-hand boom, the waste, or the engine is caused by the plaintiff's combat action, the performance of his/her equivalent duties, or the performance of his/her duties.

(b).