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. After graduating from B High School on February 1, 1980, the Plaintiff is serving as a staff staff member of the Air Force.

On November 1, 2002, he/she was discharged from military service on March 31, 2014.

B. On June 14, 2012, the Plaintiff asserted that “a maintenance work for the support of aircraft operations was cut off from the front part of the aircraft day, faced with the right shoulder and neck on the floor,” and applied for registration of persons who rendered distinguished services to the State on May 21, 2014, by applying for registration of a person who rendered distinguished services to the State on the ground that “a light signboard escape certificate 5/6/7 U.S. (hereinafter “the instant disability”).

C. On November 18, 2014 after the deliberation of the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement, the Defendant: (a) rendered a decision on the amount of non-conformity of the requirements for soldiers and police officers and police officers on the ground that the injury in the instant case was caused directly by the performance of duties or education and training directly related to national defense security or the protection of the people’s life and property; (b) the occurrence of the injury or the speed of natural progress higher than that of the occurrence or nature progress; or (c) other performance of duties or education and training not directly related to national defense security, etc., which are caused by the occurrence or the rapid aggravation of the occurrence or the speed of natural progress higher than

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 4 (which include any number; hereinafter the same shall apply)

- The purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The difference between the Plaintiff’s assertion was directly caused by the instant accident that occurred during the aircraft maintenance work, and the maintenance of the aircraft performed by the Plaintiff constitutes a soldier or policeman on duty under the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State, since it is directly related to the protection of people’s lives and property.