1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On October 6, 1969, the background B of the disposition (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) entered the Marine Corps and participated in Vietnam from July 8, 1970 to July 21, 1971, but died on May 31, 1972 after the date of discharge from military service on April 3, 196.

On October 13, 2010, the Plaintiff asserted that, as the deceased’s spouse, the deceased died of her Hemal heart disease, which is one of the suffering from defoliants, and filed an application for registration of bereaved family members of patients suffering from actual aftereffects of defoliants (hereinafter referred to as “instant application”) under Article 8 of the Act on the Assistance to Patients suffering from Actual or Potential Diseases and the Establishment of Related Associations (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).

Accordingly, the results of the examination conducted by the National Veterans Hospital, the "Sto-Stol-Stol-Stol-Stol-S ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton ton

However, even before that, the Plaintiff asserted that the deceased died from urology, an actual aftereffects of defoliants, and rejected all of the applications filed by the Defendant for the registration of bereaved family members of patients suffering from actual aftereffects of defoliants, and the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the second refusal disposition by the Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2011Gudan18017, but the judgment against the Plaintiff became final and conclusive on the ground that the deceased was not proven to have suffered from urology due to the disease of the deceased.

In addition, the plaintiff 2012

7. 4. The Defendant asserted that the Deceased died due to a her Hemal heart disease, one of actual aftereffects of defoliants, as in the instant case, and filed an application for the registration of bereaved family members of patients suffering from actual aftereffects of defoliants (hereinafter “instant application”), but the Defendant rendered a decision on July 2, 2013 to satisfy the requirements.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the disposition by Seoul Administrative Court 2013Gudan15203 (hereinafter referred to as “the previous lawsuit of this case”), but the court on October 8, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “the evidence presented by the Plaintiff”), however, the deceased’s blood transfusion.