1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The following facts in the course of the disposition do not conflict between the parties, or may be recognized by adding the whole purport of the pleadings to each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 17, or are significant facts in this court.

On August 3, 1964, while serving in the Marine Corps, the Plaintiff was discharged on September 1, 1965 from military service on December 31, 1966.

B. On October 15, 2008, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of a person who has rendered distinguished service to the Defendant by asserting that “contributary chronic stress disorder or external stress disorder occurred during the performance of the duty at the time of the Vietnam War” was caused by the enemy’s bomb. However, on February 5, 2009, the Defendant rendered a decision on February 13, 2009, on the following grounds: “The record that was treated under the omb’s Act was confirmed, but each of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the instant injuries in this case shall not be recognized in proximate causal relation with the performance of official duties because it was impossible to confirm the military service-related data other than the diagnosis written statement by the Rabi surety and the discharge.”

(hereinafter “Prior Disposition”). C.

The plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the preceding disposition of this case with the Seoul Administrative Court 2009Gudan8130, but the above court dismissed the plaintiff's claim on December 16, 2009 on the grounds that the medical records against the plaintiff during and after the military service, diagnosis records at the time of application for registration of persons of distinguished service to the State, examination records at the time of application for registration of persons of distinguished service to the State, examination records at around March 191 and around August 2009, and medical professional data on the cause of spactic chronology, etc. on December 16, 2009.

The plaintiff appealed from 2010Nu902 as a party member and submitted a documentary evidence of causation and examined the witness of B who participated in the Vietnam War as a correspondence soldier.