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 September 26, 1979, the Plaintiff (B) entered the Army and completed a new education and training course for the Army, and completed the education and training course for the relocation of an excursion ship from November 9, 1979 to December 15, 1979, received the education course for the relocation of an excursion ship at the main communications training center, and was placed on December 18, 1979 and was discharged from military service on March 6, 1981.

B. On March 12, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration with the Defendant on March 12, 2013, stating that “the Plaintiff had full right knee in the principal communication training room around December 1979.” and that “the Plaintiff had full right knee in the middle of the heavy river education curriculum at the principal communication training center,” and filed an application for registration with the person of distinguished service to the State, who is a person who has rendered distinguished service to the Defendant.

C. On June 27, 2013, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting persons of distinguished services to the State (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “The injury in the instant case is deemed to have deteriorated due to the aggravation of the sick and wounded, and thus, it does not constitute the requirements for persons of distinguished services to the State under 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 of Distinguished Services to the State”), but does not meet the requirements for persons eligible for veteran’s compensation under the Act on Support for Persons of Distinguished Services to the State.”

On October 7, 2013, the Plaintiff appealed to the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the said commission dismissed the relevant claim on February 18, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 7, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2, 3, 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff entered the active service without any problem before entering the Plaintiff, and received education at a harsh level of 20 degrees he was under his superior around November 1, 1979 or around December 12, 198 while undergoing training at the main telecommunications training center.