1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 13, 2011, the Plaintiff entered the Army and discharged the Plaintiff from active service on March 12, 2013.

B. On July 5, 2011, the Plaintiff was receiving medical treatment while undergoing hydro-shot training at the Edial Training Center. However, even after his/her own transfer, he/she continued to undergo X-ray shooting at the KOyang Hospital on August 12, 201, and conducted X-ray shooting on August 22, 201, and sought opinions that it is necessary to conduct a restoration operation on the right angles, in order to the right angles, at the Edial Hospital located in the Edic City on August 29, 2011, and was hospitalized at the KOyang Hospital in the National Armed Forces on August 30, 201.

9.5. The above hospital received the above operation.

C. On March 22, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for distinguished service to the head of the Gwangju Regional Veterans Office. The Board of Patriots and Veterans decided on June 25, 2013 that the Plaintiff meets the requirements for the provision of distinguished service to the State. The head of the Gwangju Regional Veterans Administration notified the Plaintiff on July 18, 2013, however, he decided that the Plaintiff would be ineligible for the provision of distinguished service to the State on January 15, 2014, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s physical examination was conducted, on the ground that “the certificate and function limitation of the visiting party are met, but does not meet the criteria for the provision of distinguished service to the State.” The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the above disposition with the Gwangju District Court 2014Gudan192, but the judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on May 18, 2016 was finalized thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including a provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion: ① there was a considerable distance between the project site and the target object at the time of the training of hydro-shots, so the training soldiers had to have all the power, and thus securing a safe distance to prevent the collision between the training soldiers, but the school officer failed to secure a sufficient safe distance and caused the training soldiers, including the Plaintiff, to drive the hydro-shots to the training soldiers, without securing a sufficient safe distance; and the Plaintiff was operated along the side by administering the hydro-shots.