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 25, 2017, the Plaintiff entered the Gangwon Provincial Police Agency as of December 8, 2016 and was on duty at the time of having been assigned to the Gangwon Provincial Police Agency B, and was discharged on July 17, 2017 from active service on August 28, 2017.

B. The Plaintiff asserted that “after entering the Daegu auxiliary Police Education Center, the Plaintiff continued to have difficulty in hiding down while undergoing the training for auxiliary police officers at the education center for auxiliary police officers in Daegu, and was diagnosed with an anti-competitive disability, and thereafter, the Plaintiff aggravated the state due to the desire and violence of the demonstration team during which he was placed in the field of impeachment in each state, and applied for registration of persons of distinguished services to the State and persons of distinguished services to the State and persons of distinguished services to the State, on the basis of the difference in the instant application.

C. On January 9, 2018, the Defendant rendered a non-specific decision on the requirements for persons who have rendered distinguished service to the State and rendered a non-specific decision on the requirements for persons who have rendered distinguished service to the State, on the ground that there is no evidence to deem that the Plaintiff was in a cruel situation, such as Gota or verbal abuse while serving in the military, or training and work in a special working environment similar to any other club fees, etc., and thus, there is no evidence to deem that there is a proximate causal relation between the instant wounds and education and training

(hereinafter collectively referred to as "each disposition of this case"). 【No dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence 1, 4 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

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

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) is undergoing harsh acts, such as old or verbal abuse, during the active service period of auxiliary police officers; (2) The Plaintiff was trained at the Daegu Medical Police Education Center, and was under stress due to education and training and closed military life; and was under stress due to the desire and violence of the demonstration unit at the early impeachment demonstration site in 2017, and became the same group training.