1. On March 11, 2014, the Defendant’s revocation of a decision on the change of the rating of the re-determination of a physical examination conducted by the Plaintiff.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 21, 2004, the Plaintiff was discharged from military service on September 6, 2005 while serving in the Gun.

B. On July 20, 2005, the Plaintiff, upon discharge, filed an application for registration with the Defendant for distinguished service to the State by asserting that “the Plaintiff was suffering from the wounds of the right scare, plucker, and the side part of the side of the scare and the inside side of the scare (hereinafter “the instant difference”) while getting off from the train on July 20, 2005. The Defendant recognized the instant difference as an official wound and determined that the Plaintiff’s disability rating was Grade 7, Class 807 (one of three sections of one bridge), which was 7, class 807 (one of the three sections of one bridge).

C. On August 16, 2013, the Plaintiff applied for a medical examination for re-determination to the Defendant pursuant to Article 6-3(2)4 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “Act”). On March 11, 2014, the Defendant falls under class 7 and class 807, which are the previous disability rating, following the deliberation and resolution of the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement, pursuant to Article 14(3) [Attachment 3] of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State, which is currently being implemented (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree”), and falls

The decision that there is no change in the disposition of this case (hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”) was notified.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1's each entry, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. After the Plaintiff’s assertion was determined as Class 7 807, the disability rating of the Plaintiff became worse, and the Plaintiff’s right-hand kne-free field of 5 degrees is merely 55 degrees. In light of the fact that a normal person’s physical exercise area is 150 degrees 150 degrees, the Defendant’s disposition of this case is unlawful, even though it constitutes “a person who has a disability in the middle of the official section” as provided in class 6 1 or 2 of the disability rating.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

(c) Determination 1) Article 14(3) [Attachment 3] of the Enforcement Decree of the Act.