1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of disposition;

A. On June 30, 2015, the Plaintiff entered the Army on April 9, 2014, and was discharged from military service on June 30, 2015, filed an application for registration of persons of distinguished service to the State on July 6, 2015, with regard to “Huuri-ri (protruding escape certificate), post-mathrosis, and antipathal function disorder.”

B. On November 13, 2015, the Defendant: (a) on the ground that the post-sign escape certificate L4-5, on November 13, 2015, was a direct cause for the injury incurred in the performance of duties or education and training directly related to the national defense, the national security, or the protection of the people’s life and property; (b) on the ground that the remaining difference in the application is not found to have proximate causal relation with the military’s performance of duties; (c) rendered a non-conformity of the requirements for soldier or policeman’s duty; (d) on the ground that the remaining difference in the application

(hereinafter referred to as “protruding escape certificate L4-5”, and the decision corresponding to the requirements of soldier or policeman wounded on duty as to this issue shall be referred to as “the instant disposition”).

The plaintiff appealed against this and filed an administrative appeal, but the claim was dismissed on March 8, 2016.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1, 2, Eul's 1-1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. On June 9, 2014, the instant difference occurred due to the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) that took place in the field of training in the field of training in the training center, and thus, the instant disposition taken on different premise is unlawful. (ii) Article 3 [Attachment 1] 2-8 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State (hereinafter “Act on Persons, etc.”) provides that “where an existing disease or aggravation is caused” is excluded in relation to the criteria for recognition of persons of distinguished service to the State, which delegates the criteria and scope of the requirements for persons of distinguished service to the State, the statutory provisions of Article 4(2) of the Act on Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service to the State that delegated the criteria and scope