1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 12, 2013, the Plaintiff entered the Army Soldiers as B students.

On February 10, 2014, the Plaintiff was diagnosed by the Seoul Asan Hospital as the “siveive disorder of stimulative disorder of stimulity.” On May 7, 2014, the Plaintiff was discharged from military service.

B. On October 30, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for registration of persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State and persons eligible for veteran’s compensation on the ground of “cerebral shock” (hereinafter “application shock”).

C. On April 9, 2015, the Defendant rendered a disposition against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the applicant’s filing of the application was caused by the military performance of duties or education and training directly related to the national defense, etc., or that the occurrence or aggravation is not recognized as caused by proximate causal relation with the military performance of duties or education and training” (hereinafter “instant disposition”) and rendered a non-specific decision corresponding to the requirements for persons eligible for veteran’s compensation among the above dispositions.

[Ground of recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 1 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff caused mental illness or aggravated due to stress that the Plaintiff was unable to have a sense of mind in a state where he was unable to adapt to the new environment, which is a military entrance.

Since there is a proximate causal relationship between the Plaintiff’s filing of the application and the military service, the instant disposition is unlawful.

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

C. 1) The Plaintiff returned to the Republic of Korea for the purpose of attending a university, after graduating from a high school to Canada, while studying in Canada during the third year of a middle school.

B) On August 27, 2013, the Plaintiff received a normal judgment in both a psychiatrist and its related items in the result of a physical examination for conscription for entering the military. On the other hand, the Plaintiff’s parents did not have any details of medical treatment related to mental illness, and even before entering the Plaintiff.