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 December 12, 2016, the Plaintiff entered the Air Force, and was discharged from active service on November 23, 2017, and on December 11, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person who rendered distinguished services to the State on the ground that “the Plaintiff, at around 07:00 on December 18, 2016, he/she was unable to secure that he/she would have to walk down at the inner border while moving to a restaurant, and suffered injuries to both knee and hne on the ground floor.”

B. On May 11, 2018, the Defendant does not fall under the requirements of Article 4(1)6 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment of and Support for Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “Act on the Honorable Treatment of Persons of Distinguished Services to the State”) and Article 2(1)2 of the Act on Support for Persons Eligible for Veteran’s Compensation (hereinafter “Act on the Honorable Treatment of Persons of Distinguished Services to the State”). The part of the “L4-5” portion of the “L4-5” portion of the “L4-5” (hereinafter “S. 1”) falls under the requirements of the Act on the Honorable Treatment of Persons of Distinguished Services to the State. The Defendant does not fall under the requirements of the “person of distinguished Services to the State” among the persons of distinguished services to the State under the Act on the Honorable Treatment of and Support for Persons of Distinguished Services to the State.

[The facts that there is no dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 2, and No. 4, the whole purport of the pleading.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. On December 12, 2016, while entering the Air Force on December 12, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant injury and disease occurred as a soldier or policeman under the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State, the Plaintiff’s action was unlawful since it fell under the category of soldier or policeman under the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State.

(1) The Act on Persons of Distinguished Service to the State.