유족연금 수급대상자 인정불가 결정취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On May 31, 1968, the Plaintiff’s partner B (hereinafter “the deceased”) was discharged from military service on the part of the Army as Warrant on May 31, 1968 and died on May 30, 1984.
B. On June 25, 1984, the Plaintiff directly claimed a survivor pension under the Military Pension Act (Evidence 1) upon the death of the deceased, but the survivor pension was fully paid to the deceased’s spouse and the Plaintiff’s mother C.
C. C’s death on October 18, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for the transfer of entitlement to survivor pension on December 21, 2018.
On January 4, 2019, the Defendant rendered a decision not to recognize the beneficiary of the survivor pension (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s claim was made after the lapse of five years from the date of death of the Deceased, and the prescription was completed. At the time of the Deceased’s death, there was insufficient evidence to prove that the Plaintiff was a disabled child.
On May 30, 1984, the Plaintiff applied for recognition of the Defendant as a beneficiary of a survivor pension on December 21, 2018 on the ground that he/she was a child of 18 years of age or older at the time of the deceased’s death. However, the Plaintiff’s application date clearly shows the lapse of the five-year extinctive prescription period under Article 8(1) of the Military Pension Act.
However, at the time of the death of the deceased, the fact that the Plaintiff, other than the Plaintiff’s mother, directly prepared and submitted the claim for the survivor pension, and the Plaintiff’s mother did not confirm the fact that only the Plaintiff’s mother was receiving the survivor pension after the death of the deceased, and the Plaintiff did not know that his child at the time of the death of the deceased fell under the eligibility for the survivor pension, and based on the claim that he was known after the Plaintiff’s mother’s death, it is reasonable to determine that the claim for the survivor pension prepared by the Plaintiff at the time was made and submitted by the Plaintiff’s representative, not the claim for the