1. On August 14, 2013, the Defendant rendered a decision that constituted a person of distinguished service to the State and was entitled to veteran’s compensation.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 15, 2009, the Plaintiff’s husband B (hereinafter “the deceased”) entered the Army, and was transferred to the Army on September 30, 2009, and served as the head of the Ban from the third half of the fleet C, the third half of the fleet C as the head of the Ban.

B. On March 3, 2012, the Deceased worked at the unit to which he belongs for the preparation of large-scale warehouse, and arranged the warehouse, and worked at the unit to which he belongs, and then took a rest with noncommissioned officers who were engaged in the same duties as at the time, including middle-scale D. D. On March 4, 2012, middle-standing D used a talk with the Deceased and went through a singing room. On March 4, 2012, at around 00:50, the Deceased died from the left face of the Deceased on one occasion due to his own drinking.

C. On April 16, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person who has rendered distinguished service to the State or a person eligible for veteran’s compensation. On August 14, 2013, the Defendant rendered a decision to constitute a person eligible for distinguished service to the State or a person eligible for veteran’s compensation on the ground that “the deceased’s death was caused by an accident that occurred during his/her private activities after work hours and is not a deceased person due to his/her performance of duties or education and training directly related to national

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

On November 8, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition, and the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on March 11, 2014.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1, 2 and Eul's 6, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. On March 3, 2012, the Plaintiff asserted that he worked at the military unit to be affiliated with the deceased, and performed official duties to prepare for the construction of the large warehouse. At the time’s proposal, he worked at the military unit as a superior of the deceased, and provided meals to the non-commissioned officers who performed official duties. At the singing room, D goes out of the deceased and falls short of the deceased’s duties.