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 June 27, 2000, the Plaintiff entered the Army and was discharged from office on August 19, 2002.

B. On January 3, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State with the assertion that “the Plaintiff incurred depression, depression, and bipolartic disorder while serving in the military (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant wounds”).”

C. On May 6, 2013, the Defendant rendered a decision on the eligibility of a person who rendered distinguished services to the State and a person eligible for veteran’s compensation (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the instant wounds cannot be deemed to have arisen due to the performance of official duties in the military.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 7 and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted no mental disorder before entering the Plaintiff, and even in the draft physical and the draft physical examination, the Plaintiff received a normal judgment in the area of the mind and body. Since the instant difference was caused by the severe work during his service after entering the army and the harsh act of an appointed soldier, there is a proximate causal relation between the Plaintiff’s performance of military duties and the instant difference.

B. Determination 1) Article 4(1)6 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State (hereinafter “Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons of Distinguished Service to the State”) and Article 2(1)2 of the Act on Support for Persons Eligible for Veteran’s Compensation refers to the injury or disease that a soldier or police officer sustained in the course of performing his/her duties or in the course of education and training or in the performance of his/her duties. Therefore, in order to be different from the above provision, there is a proximate causal relation between the education and training or in the performance of his/her duties and the injury or disease, and the causal relation between the injury and the injury must be proved by the party asserting it. 2) The statement in the evidence Nos. 2-3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 5 of the Act on the Support