1. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 12, 1987, the deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”) entered the Army Noncommissioned Officers’ School, and was on November 1, 2002, when he was on duty as a transportation officer at the Army B, and was on duty as a transportation officer at the Army B, and was on July 2, 2007. On December 201, 201, he was on duty as a transportation officer at the D unit, and was on duty as a transportation officer at the D unit, and was used on March 20, 2013 and was transferred to the hospital, but died on March 22, 2013.

B. On June 4, 2013, the Plaintiff, as the wife of the Deceased, appealed to the Defendant on June 4, 2013, “The deceased performed his duties excessively than a soldier on ordinary day, ordinarily worked for about 05:00 and worked for about 21:00, and had a heavy physical and mental burden, and the body’s escape is difficult until the end of the week as a unit, and the transport officer has many difficulties, such as circulation bridge is impossible, adjustment of work hours, and securing the surface time, and as a person in charge of vehicle operation, the Plaintiff, as the wife of the Deceased, faithfully committed the transport pipe’s duties with physical and mental burden, such as suffering from extreme stress after his retirement, and transferred to the hospital on March 22, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State with respect to the State by asserting that he died with livering ties.”

C. On November 5, 2013, the Defendant issued a disposition that the Plaintiff does not meet the requirements for persons who rendered distinguished services to the State and the requirements for persons eligible for veteran’s compensation on the ground that there is no proximate causal relation between the performance of duties or education and training

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul Nos. 1, 3 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that he performed an excessive duty as a transport supervisor during military service, and that he was unable to receive serious stress even after leaving work hours due to the characteristics of the transport supervisor’s duty. As such, the deceased’s death and performance of duty due to the outbreak and aggravation of liver cancer.