1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The plaintiff's primary claim is dismissed.

B. The Defendant on September 2013.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court, such as accepting the judgment of the court of first instance, is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (excluding the part of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding the part of the judgment of the court of first instance 3.), except for the modification of the last 2 pages to 5 pages 12 as follows. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act

Article 4(1)6 of 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.”) unlike 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); Article 4(1)6 of 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”); and Article 4(1)6 of 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

Unlike this, a wounded person is eligible for veteran’s compensation pursuant to Article 2(1)2 of the Act on Support for Persons Eligible for Veteran’s Compensation, which is not directly related to the national defense, etc. (hereinafter “the Veterans’ Compensation Act”).

As such, the purport of the former Act on Persons of Distinguished Service to the State is to divide persons of distinguished service to the State by revising the Act on Persons of Distinguished Service to the State. If the former Act on Persons of Distinguished Service to the State recognizes only proximate causal relation between such performance of duties, education and training, and death or injury regardless of the content of education and training, it is corrected that the scope of recognition of persons of distinguished service to the State has deteriorated the identity of persons of distinguished service to the State. Accordingly, persons who are obliged to receive honor