1. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.

2. The Defendant’s person eligible for veteran’s compensation against the Plaintiff on July 13, 2015.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 17, 2014, the Plaintiff entered the Army, and served in the 80 Volunteer Team B B (hereinafter “instant unit”) of the 28 History B (hereinafter “instant unit”) and was discharged from active service on January 12, 2015.

B. On January 22, 2015, the Plaintiff filed for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State under the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State (hereinafter “Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State”) with the Defendant on the ground that “In the course of performing the State Guidance Training on July 29, 2014, an injury was inflicted on the part of Heluri-ri, and caused L4-5 (hereinafter “

[The Act on Support for Persons Eligible for Veteran's Compensation(hereinafter referred to as the "Act on Veterans' Compensation").

) A person eligible for veteran’s compensation shall be deemed to have filed for registration together in accordance with Article 4(2).

The Defendant developed the instant difference as a direct cause for the performance of duties or education and training directly related to the national security or the protection of the people’s lives and property.

(1) On July 13, 2015, the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement issued a notice to the Plaintiff on July 13, 2015, that it is not determined that the State’s defense and security, or the performance of duties or education and training that are not directly related to the protection of the people’s life and property, and that the development or the rapid aggravation of the development of the State’s duty or education and training is above the level of natural progress.

(2) Each of the following facts: (a) Each of the instant persons of distinguished service to the State; (b) each of the instant dispositions “a non-applicable disposition of non-applicable eligibility for the person eligible for veteran’s compensation”; and (c) each of the aforementioned dispositions was combined and “each of the instant dispositions”; (d) the purport of each of the written evidence No. 2, No. 2, and evidence No. 1; and

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff was placed as a unit of this case, and the Plaintiff was on July 29, 2014, after the Plaintiff was placed as a member of the instant unit.