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 February 21, 1996, the Plaintiff entered the Army and was discharged on July 31, 2004 from military service on December 7, 2003 from military service by suffering from each of the instant injuries and the visual disorder of 0.06 in the military force (hereinafter “instant wounds”).

B. On February 25, 2005, the Plaintiff was awarded a disability rating of Grade 7 201 pursuant to Article 6-4 of the former Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State (amended by Act No. 7646, Jul. 29, 2005) and Article 14 [Attachment 3] of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State (amended by Presidential Decree No. 18982, Jul. 27, 2005).

C. On January 7, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for a re-determination with the Defendant on the ground that the instant wounds have deteriorated. On February 25, 2015, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition to the Plaintiff on April 30, 2015, based on the re-determination 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, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State”) and Article 6-4 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State”).

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's No. 1, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, Eul's evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was measured with safety balance of 0.02 or less 0.3 of the friendly correction trial force, as a result of the Plaintiff’s examination conducted at the Gangwon University Hospital on February 4, 2015 due to the aggravation of its symptoms by suffering from the instant wounds, and accordingly, the instant difference ought to be determined as a disability rating under Article 14 [Attachment Table 3] of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State, Article 14 [Attachment Table 3] 111 or 1113 or 114 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State.

However, on the basis of the result of the re-examination conducted in bad faith as a single inspection organization, the defendant's disability rating of class 7 1115 is as to the instant disability.