1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 3, 2012, the Plaintiff enlisted in the Army and discharged the Plaintiff from active service on July 22, 2013.

B. During the training on October 9, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a diagnosis to the effect that he/she shall appeal the He/she has to take a stable leave from his/her superior and military officers, but continue to perform snow removal work and boundary duty, and he/she received a diagnosis of “pappropin escape certificate (e.g., 4-5, 5-Woman 1),” around April 2013 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the instant wound”), and received a diagnosis of “pappropin escape certificate” (e.g., 4-5), and then passed the post-pinculatory recinary and scraping (e.g., 5-Woman 1), the partial brecinary he/she received a diagnosis on May 10, 2013.”

C. On October 20, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person who rendered distinguished services to the State with the cause of disability to the Defendant, stating that the cause of disability to the Defendant was “influence by going beyond the snow removal work,” and that the injured part was “Grae (5-6).”

On February 15, 2016, the Defendant issued a non-specific disposition against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the injury was not directly caused by the performance of duties or education and training directly related to national security or the protection of people’s lives and property, and thus, it does not constitute the requirements for persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State under the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State”)” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

E. However, on February 15, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition on the ground that “the instant wound was determined as a salvable disease, but it is deemed that it was significantly aggravated due to the burden on the part of the military due to repeated military training, work, etc. after entering the army.” Accordingly, the Plaintiff was judged Class 7 6109 of the disability rating as a result of the physical examination, and the Defendant was the Defendant on February 15, 2016.