1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff entered the Navy on May 20, 1963, and was discharged from military service on November 30, 1972 after he participated in the Vietnam War from July 29, 1967 to May 21, 1968.

B. The plaintiff was exposed to defoliants during the Vietnam War and suffered from urine, horse-pathalosis, brutitis, brutitis, and bridge, etc., and was subject to each of the following dispositions by the defendant upon filing an application for registration of defoliant symptoms with the defendant:

1) On October 7, 2004, the Plaintiff applied for registration of patients suffering from defoliants with the name of disease as “urine disease” (hereinafter “urine disease in this case”) to the Defendant (the head of the Masan Branch Office at the time”), and on November 7, 2004, as a result of the examination of the Busan Veterans Hospital, “urine disease” was recognized as “patient suffering from actual aftereffects of defoliants” as prescribed in Article 5 of the Act on Assistance to Patients suffering from Actual or Potential Diseases, etc. and Establishment of Related Associations (hereinafter “Curine Act”).

However, on January 7, 2005, the Plaintiff received a judgment below the standard for rating on the ground that “cathosomes do not have any urology or cathosome urology, urology, or urology,” and received from the Defendant on January 18, 2005 “a decision not to apply the law”.

B) On April 9, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for re-verification of patients suffering from defoliants with the Defendant, and on May 30, 2013, the Plaintiff was determined as “outboard of disability rating” as the result of the re-verification at the Busan Veterans Hospital on May 30, 2013. Accordingly, on August 13, 2013, the Defendant rendered the instant injury and disease to the Plaintiff on August 13, 2013 after deliberation and resolution by the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement on July 31, 2013 (hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff did not recognize that “the instant injury and disease was a physical examination result, not a medical examination result, and the body part (multi-caturology urology), but it did not meet the criteria of disability rating since there was no opinion on the re-verification of urology and the urology merger” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

(2) .2)