1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. On December 9, 2013, the Plaintiff entered the Army and discharged the Plaintiff from military service on August 28, 2014.

On September 30, 2014, the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant accident”) was in the process of inspecting the chemical, biological, and chemical, biological, and coloned vehicle (K-10) on April 7, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of persons who have rendered distinguished services to the State with the intention of rendering distinguished services to the State, while she faced knee with an accident falling under 1m 50cc (hereinafter “instant accident”), resulting in a mone caused by a mone to the front-down prevention tape of the vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

On February 2, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision on the requirements for persons who have rendered distinguished service to the State and the requirements for persons eligible for veteran’s compensation on the grounds that it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff’s injury caused the performance of military duties or education and training, or that the relocation of the military entrance to the Republic of Korea rapidly aggravated due to

(hereinafter referred to as "disposition in this case"). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, Eul evidence No. 2 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The difference in the Plaintiff’s assertion was caused by the instant accident, or the existing disease was aggravated beyond the natural progress, and thus, the instant disposition was unlawful.

B. In order to recognize “an injury during education and training or performance of duty (including illness in the line of duty)” as referred to in Article 4(1)6 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State, there should be a proximate causal relation between the education and training or performance of duty and the injury and disease, and the causal relation should be attested

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Du3188, Nov. 26, 2015). Only evidence of Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 (including a provisional number) is insufficient to recognize that an applicant’s disease was caused by military service or that an existing disease was aggravated beyond the natural progress, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

On the other hand, this Court is against the Ansan University Hospital.