1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The defendant's refusal to grant a meritorious service to the plaintiff on October 26, 2009.

1. The court's explanation concerning this part of the reasons is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part of the reasons is cited by Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff's assertion did not have any special degree of kneee in knee, but he sustained knee injury during his training, and thereafter aggravated the above injury, resulting in the difference in this case. Since the difference in this case occurred in the military service or has aggravated beyond natural progress, there is a proximate causal relation, the disposition of this case is unlawful.

B. The facts of recognition (1) The Plaintiff served as a communications soldier on January 28, 2008, when entering the Army. The Plaintiff did not receive medical treatment in relation to kneeee, from October 199 to his entrance under the Health Insurance Benefit Act. In the physical examination in 2007, the Plaintiff was judged as being subject to the enlistment in active duty service in the National Armed Forces of the Republic of Korea, but the Plaintiff was determined as being subject to the enlistment in active duty service at the National Armed Forces of the Republic of Korea with the knee certificate, and the records of the outpatient patient treatment in the above hospital were written as follows.

On March 25, 2008: (IDK), address- left-hand knee knee knee knee - knee knee knee knee knee knee knee kne knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee 15, 208: on December 30, 208: on March 3, 2009: Address knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee ke ke knee ke k.