1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 7, 2014, the Plaintiff entered the Army, and was on duty in the first to second to second to second to 5 of the Army Group 55 of the Army, and was discharged from military service on May 12, 2015.

B. On February 16, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration with the Defendant on May 19, 2015, alleging that he/she was killed in an accident that goes beyond stairs as a patrol (hereinafter “instant accident”) during the performance of the duty of boundary operations and was suffering from “protruding signboards escape certificate” (hereinafter “the instant accident”).

C. After deliberation by the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement, on September 24, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision on the non-conformity of the requirements for a person of distinguished service to the State (hereinafter “instant Disposition 1”) and the non-conformity of the requirements for a person eligible for veteran’s compensation (hereinafter “instant Disposition 2”), on the ground that “the performance of duties or education and training directly related to the security of national security, etc. of the country with which the instant injury was caused as a direct cause, or that it was not rapidly aggravated at a natural progress speed.”

(hereinafter referred to as "each disposition of this case" in total of dispositions Nos. 1 and 2 of this case). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and Eul evidence No. 1 (including provisional numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The difference between the Plaintiff’s assertion and the instant accident occurred directly due to the Plaintiff’s occurrence of the instant accident that occurred while performing the duty of boundary operations.

In addition, even if the Plaintiff had an existing chronic disease, the disease rapidly aggravated more than the natural progress speed due to the accident in this case.

Therefore, each of the dispositions of this case by the defendant on different premise is unlawful.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. Determination as to the primary claim (i) the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “Act on the Persons of Distinguished Services to the State”).

§ 4.