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 June 25, 1984, the Plaintiff (B) entered the Army and was discharged from military service on September 7, 1985, and on July 4, 2017, the Defendant filed an application with the Defendant for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State on the following grounds: “The Plaintiff (B) was under a franchial surgery while in military service, was injured by a bridge bridge, during a severe shooting training, and was suffering from neutism, during the incineration, entered the flachisium, entered the flachisium, and was flachising in the face during the training, and entered the flachisium, and was forced to undergo the blachisium surgery at the military team.”

B. On September 19, 2017, following the deliberation of the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement, the Defendant issued a disposition equivalent to the amount of persons who rendered distinguished services to the State and a disposition equivalent to the amount of persons eligible for veteran’s compensation (hereinafter “each of the dispositions of this case”) on the ground that “The injury in this case was recognized as having a proximate causal link with the performance of duties or education and training directly related to national security, etc., or cannot be deemed as having caused the occurrence or aggravation of the causal link with other duties or education and training.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

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

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant wound was caused or aggravated as he was subject to harsh training while serving in the military.

Therefore, the difference in this case occurred due to the performance of duties or education and training directly related to the national defense security or the protection of the people's life property, and there is causation between the injury and the performance of official duties, etc., which can be sufficiently recognized as the statement of the former who performed military service together with the plaintiff.

Nevertheless, the defendant.