1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff entered the Army on November 4, 1997 and was discharged from office on January 10, 200.

B. On July 4, 2005, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration with a person who has rendered distinguished services to the State by asserting that: (a) the Defendant had caused a “mental fission” (hereinafter “instant wounds”); and (b) on July 3, 2006, the Defendant rendered a decision on the non-conformity of the requirements for persons who have rendered distinguished services to

Therefore, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the cancellation of the above disposition and lost in the first and second instances, but the Supreme Court reversed and remanded the case, and the defendant made a recommendation for mediation to register the plaintiff as a person of distinguished service to the State in the reversed and remanded trial.

(C) Changwon District Court 2007Guhap847, Busan High Court 2008Nu969, Supreme Court 2010Du15193).

On August 24, 2011, the Defendant registered the Plaintiff as a person of distinguished service to the State in accordance with the recommendation for mediation. On September 25, 2013, the Plaintiff determined that the Plaintiff’s disability rating was “Class 6(2)4208.” D. On September 25, 2013, the Plaintiff applied for a re-determination physical examination on the instant difference to the Defendant, and on December 24, 2013, the Defendant rendered a disposition of re-determination of the physical examination to the Plaintiff on December 24, 2013 as “Class 5(4206).”

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) e.

On February 24, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on April 1, 2014.

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

2. The attachment to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be as follows;

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion constitutes “a person who cannot engage in labor for one’s life due to mental disorder” under [Attachment 3] attached Table 4204 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State (hereinafter “Act”) as a state in which it is extremely difficult to lead a daily life due to the instant wounds.

Therefore, the Plaintiff.