1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

The plaintiff in the Gu office is as follows.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 8, 2001, the Plaintiff, who entered the Army and was discharged from military service on May 7, 2003, and was discharged from military service on May 7, 2003, filed an application for registration with the Defendant on October 13, 2015 for a person who rendered distinguished service to the State.

B. On January 8, 2016, the Defendant rendered a decision to the Plaintiff on the following grounds: (a) on January 8, 2016, based on the resolution of the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement, that “The Defendant only stated the past forces of having discharged the instant wounded person from the hospital in two times, and without the special treatment of the hospital at the time; and (b) it is difficult to recognize the relevance of official duties except where the direct cause of livers, such as two wounds, is evident in the performance of official duties, considering the medical opinions of the instant wounded person; and (c) it is difficult to find that the instant wounded person was diagnosed through the brain rapion of the National Armed Forces Hospital in the National Armed Forces following the diagnosis of the instant wounds, and that there was a delay in diagnosis and treatment, and thus, it does not constitute the requirements for persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State and the requirements for persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State.” (hereinafter collectively, decisions that the instant wounded person does not constitute persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on March 24, 2016, but was dismissed on June 24, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

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

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is the injury of head, injury of the same day, delay in the treatment of injury of the same day, and head, injury of head, shortage of military water surface, stress, etc. caused by the act of the beta of the sick President B, which occurred around July 2001.