1. The Defendant’s decision that rendered against the Plaintiff on December 26, 2012 constituted a non-conformity of the requirements for a person of distinguished service to the State shall be revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 17, 2013, the Plaintiff entered the Army and was discharged from military service on September 2, 2014.

B. On January 29, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration with the Defendant on September 26, 2014, alleging that the ice escape certificate (hereinafter referred to as “the instant difference”) was created between the 4-5 times in the 23th Scadic Education Team near the 23th Scadic Education Team, resulting in a ice-scopic injury, which was caused by the ice-scopic from the ice-scopic path near the ice-hocopic training.

C. On December 26, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition that did not meet the requirements for persons who rendered distinguished services to the State (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the grounds that the instant wounds did not directly cause injury during education and training directly related to the national security of the State or the protection of people’s lives and property (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

However, the Defendant rendered a decision that the instant wounds resulted in the rapid aggravation of their natural progress due to the direct cause of education and training, and that the instant wounds meet the requirements for persons eligible for veteran's compensation (accidents of disaster injury).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff alleged that he was killed in the line of duty or education and training after entering the military, and was diagnosed as the wound in the relevant case, and was administered by the National Armed Forces Capital Hospital, and thereby discharged from the military. Since the difference of the plaintiff was directly related to the national defense security of the country or the protection of the people's lives and property, the plaintiff constitutes a person of distinguished service to the State.

(b) The attached Form of relevant statutes is as follows.

C. (1) The Plaintiff was at the time of entering the military as B, and the Plaintiff was at the time of entering the military, and there was no record of receiving hospital treatment in relation to the Domination before entering the military.

The plaintiff on January 29, 2014.