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 1, 1950, the Plaintiff was recognized as meeting the requirements for soldier or policeman wounded in action on the part of the person who was discharged from the Army as of July 1, 1954 (hereinafter “the injury in this case”), and registered as a soldier or policeman wounded in action on April 17, 200, Article 6-4 of the former Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State (amended by Act No. 9079 of March 28, 2008), Article 14 [Attachment 3] of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State (amended by Presidential Decree No. 16876 of Jun. 27, 200), and Article 14 [Attachment 3] of the former Enforcement Decree on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State.

B. On September 18, 2015, the Plaintiff applied for a re-examination on the instant wounds. On December 29, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the result of the re-examination to the effect that, according to the re-examination conducted by the Central Veterans Hospital on November 5, 2015, the disability rating was determined to fall under class 7 4115 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons of Distinguished Services to the State”), Article 6-4 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State”), and

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The Disposition in this case] is without dispute; Gap evidence 7; Eul evidence 1 through 3 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff suffered two copies and fora, due to the aftermath of the wound of this case, and when determining the disability rating, the plaintiff's disability rating should be elevated, since the plaintiff's service experience and performance as a combat soldier are considered together.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

(c) fact that no dispute has been raised;