1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the judgment of the court of first instance, states that “(6) the Plaintiff’s mental impulse that was experienced from the accident that died due to the explosion of a mine that occurred in the court of first instance is the main cause of the instant wound,” but the evidence alone submitted by the Plaintiff, which led to the occurrence of a certain accident, and thereby, the Plaintiff was subject to a certain mental impulse and there is no other causal link between the instant wound and the instant wound, and it is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment on the Plaintiff’s new argument that was raised at the court of first instance as described in paragraph (2) below, and therefore, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment on the Plaintiff’s new argument that was raised at the court of first instance as described in paragraph (2).

Additional Part

A. In the first instance, even if the Plaintiff’s application for registration of a person who rendered distinguished services to the State was without merit, the Defendant should have registered the Plaintiff at least as a person who rendered distinguished services to the State with respect to his/her duty under Article 73-2(1) of the former Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (amended by Act No. 11041, Sept. 15, 201). However, the Defendant asserts that the disposition

However, the above provision cannot be applied to the plaintiff's application for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State since it was made after the above provision was amended and deleted.

(B) Even if the above provision is applied, insofar as there is no proximate causal relationship between the cause of the occurrence of the instant wound claimed by the Plaintiff and the instant wound, the Plaintiff cannot register the Plaintiff as a volunteer soldier for supporting the injury. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit.

B. The plaintiff has reached the trial, and the defendant's disposition of this case is in accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act.