1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 17, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration with the Defendant on the ground that there was a pulmonary tuberculosis or a pulmonary cancer due to an inferior environment in the military service. On December 2, 2013, the Defendant rendered notification to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff did not meet the requirements for soldier or policeman wounded on duty, but the “waste of the pulmonary Tuberculosis Activity (hereinafter “the instant injury”), among the injury and disease alleged by the Plaintiff, constituted the requirements for soldier or policeman, and thus, partially determined the requirements for recognition

B. On January 3, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an objection by asserting that he/she recognized the Defendant as a person of distinguished service to the State, not a person of distinguished service to the State, but a person of distinguished service to the State. On July 22, 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the decision to recognize

C. After that, based on the result of the physical examination of the disability rating conducted by the Daejeon Veterans Hospital, the Board of Patriots and Veterans deliberated and resolved on the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff’s injury and disease in this case was determined as falling under Grade VII, police officers, and police officers, etc., and the Defendant rendered a decision on December 16, 2014 on the registration of a soldier, police officers

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted that he was diagnosed as a pulmonary tuberculosis while serving in military service at the Gwangju Military School in poor environment, and thereafter caused the pulmonary cancer by a complication. The plaintiff should be recognized as a person of distinguished service to the State who is not a person of distinguished service

3. Whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate

A. The Defendant’s assertion filed the instant lawsuit on July 22, 2014 after the lapse of 90 days from July 24, 2014 when the Defendant received a written decision on partial recognition of the requirements for a military person, police officer, and police officer, etc., and on January 14, 2015, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed as it is unlawful for the lapse of the filing period.

B. Article 20(1) of the Administrative Litigation Act provides that "a revocation suit shall be instituted."