1. The decision that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on February 6, 2018 constituted a pension for wounds shall be revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On February 27, 1986, the Plaintiff entered the Military Academy at the Navy on August 31, 1989, and was given medical treatment, such as a furnal surgery, on the part of the 3m below the nives of the nives of the nives of the nives of the nives of the nives of the nives, while

On March 1, 1990, the Plaintiff was discharged from military service on the part of the Captain on February 28, 1995.

B. Article 47 [Attachment 2] of the former Enforcement Decree of the Military Pension Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 19708, Oct. 23, 2006; hereinafter the same shall apply) provides that "any woman with a remarkably chest in his/her mother shall be determined at Grade 7 of the disability rating." On October 23, 2006, the former Enforcement Decree of the Military Pension Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 19708, Oct. 23, 2006,

C. The Plaintiff was diagnosed on December 20, 201, and July 20, 2012 at the Hospital and C Hospital, “Around 600 meters of the booming part of the previous salary joints, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as follows: “The booming part of the previous salary joints is observed, and the surgery and treatment is required.”

On July 27, 2012, the Plaintiff was judged as Class 7 12 of the disability rating (as a result of physical examination conducted at the Armed Forces Hospital, a person with a significant chest in the outer mother).

On December 22, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for a pension for wounds with the Defendant, and the Defendant notified the Plaintiff on February 6, 2018, on the ground that “The Plaintiff had already been in a state of disability at the time of retirement in 1995, since her chest was formed in 190. According to the former Enforcement Decree of the Military Pension Act, which was in force at the time of retirement, a male remaining with a chest is not eligible for a pension for wounds.”

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The attachment to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be as follows;

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is 1) Article 47 [Attachment 2] subparag. 12 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Military Pension Act provides only “the remaining female with a significant chest in appearance” as a disability rating and discriminates against the female and the male without reasonable grounds, and thus, violates the principle of equality under the Constitution. 2) The former Military Pension Act.