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 April 30, 1971, the Plaintiff entered the Army and was discharged from military service on March 7, 1974.

B. On June 12, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State with respect to the Defendant, claiming that there was an interest on both sides due to noise during shooting training in the New Disease Education Team, and that there was an injury to the name of two parties even after discharge, on the other hand, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State (hereinafter “the instant injury”).

C. On December 12, 2014, the Defendant rendered a decision on the eligibility of a person who rendered distinguished services to the State and a person eligible for veteran’s compensation (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the instant wound against the Plaintiff was not considered to have been caused or aggravated as a direct relation or proximate causal relation with the performance of his/her duties.

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence No. 1, Evidence No. 1, Evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff suffered a loss from both sides due to noise during shooting training in the New Disease Education Team, and the plaintiff suffered a severe loss from eliminology, mental and medical treatment, and lived in the pain after discharge.

Therefore, since the difference in this case has a proximate causal relation with the plaintiff's military service, the disposition of this case is unlawful.

B. As to the instant case, comprehensively taking account of the evidence and the following circumstances acknowledged by the overall purport of the pleadings, including evidence of No. 2, No. 2, and No. 2, and No. 5 as to the instant case, it is difficult to deem the Plaintiff to have caused the instant injury due to the Plaintiff’s exposure to noise during military service, and otherwise, the instant injury was caused by military duties or education and training directly related to the national defense, security, etc.

It is difficult to deem that the proximate causal relationship with the military service or the military service has been developed or deteriorated beyond the nature.

. The plaintiff.