1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. Re-deliberation of the requirements for persons who rendered distinguished service to the Plaintiff on August 30, 2013 by the Defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 20, 2011, the Plaintiff entered the Army and was discharged from the military service on June 13, 2012, under the diagnosis of “Banart Disease, damage, and credit” in the sixth Team B, etc., and was discharged from the military service on June 2012.

B. On September 19, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration with the Defendant for registration of a person who rendered distinguished services to the State, on the ground that “The Plaintiff applied for the following: (a) Madle Madle Madle Madle Madle Madle Madle, Madle Madle Madle Madle Madle,

C. On March 14, 2013, following the deliberation of the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement, the Defendant rendered a disposition against the Plaintiff on March 14, 2013 on the ground that there is no proximate causal relation with the military performance of official duties. D. The Defendant rendered a decision on the eligibility of a person who

On April 5, 2013, the Plaintiff submitted additional data and filed an application for reexamination. However, on August 30, 2013, the Defendant rendered a decision on the amount equivalent to the requirements for persons who rendered distinguished services to the State and persons eligible for veteran’s compensation (hereinafter “instant disposition”), on the ground that the Plaintiff was suffering from military entering the Republic of Korea and was not verified on the grounds that there was no apparent causal link between the injury and the military performance of official duties, and thus, there was no causal link between the injury and the military (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2 (including provisional number), Eul evidence 1 through 6, 15, and 18, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Before entering the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff asserted that he was treated as “the salt pans and tensions of a shoulder pipe” but did not have a big shoulder, and entered the 1st class of the active duty service. Around July 6, 201, the Plaintiff received unreasonable PRI training (a preliminary training) in the course of a new disease training, which led to the Plaintiff’s symptoms on the right shoulder, and was returned to an emergency site, but the military hospital did not undergo a proper inspection.