1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 5, 1966, the Plaintiff joined the Marine Corps and was discharged from military service on October 31, 1969, after he participated in the Vietnam War from May 16, 1968 to May 31, 1969.

B. On November 8, 2002, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the registration of a patient with high bloodtension (i.e., urology) symptoms due to machopathalopsis, nephalopsis, chronic helopsis, high blood pressure, and urology, and was recognized as actual aftereffects of defoliants only for urine diseases. As a result of the physical examination conducted by the Seoul Veterans Hospital for the determination of a disability rating, the Plaintiff was determined to fall short of the

C. Thereafter, around April 2, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of patients suffering from defoliants due to the toxic blood and high blood pressure, and received a physical examination to determine a disability rating at the Central Veterans Hospital. The Plaintiff was recognized as actual aftereffects of defoliants, as actual aftereffects of defoliants, and as having been recognized as having been suffering from potential aftereffects of defoliants with respect to high blood pressure, and received a physical examination at the Central Veterans Hospital.

On February 12, 2013, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that it was determined to fall short of the standard of rating, according to the medical opinion that the Plaintiff was “no merger with respect to the her dead blood heart disease” on May 9, 2013.

On July 17, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for a physical examination for re-examination with respect to the Hemical heart disease and received the physical examination at the Central Veterans Hospital.

On October 28, 2013, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that it was determined as falling short of the standard of grade according to the medical opinion that “no merger is filed.”

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff’s blood heart disease falls under Article 8-3 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (amended by Ordinance of the Prime Minister No. 1077, Apr. 29, 2014; hereinafter the same shall apply), [Attachment 4] Nos. 5-5106, 5106, 5108, and 7-5111 of the disability rating under [Attachment 4].

Therefore, this is different.