노령연금변경처분 취소
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
All costs of lawsuit, including the part arising from the participation in the lawsuit, shall be borne by the plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On January 19, 1984, the Plaintiff married with the Intervenor joining the Defendant (C birth; hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) and married with consultation on April 2, 1998.
B. The Plaintiff joined the National Pension Scheme for 175 months from January 1, 1988 to April 18, 2004, and received early old age pension from May 2004.
C. On August 30, 2019, after the intervenor became sixty-two years of age (under Article 8 of the Addenda to the National Pension Act (amended by July 23, 2007), the intervenor requested the defendant to pay the Plaintiff’s old age pension in installments to the intervenors.
On September 23, 2019, the Defendant rendered a disposition to change the amount of the Plaintiff’s old age pension from KRW 592,020 per month to KRW 372,420 per month (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the amount of the Plaintiff’s old age pension should be paid equally to the Plaintiff and the Intervenor during the period of marriage (from January 1, 1988 to April 2, 1998) with the Intervenor during the Plaintiff’s period of insurance coverage, and notified the Plaintiff thereof.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff's assertion
A. Article 57-2 of the former National Pension Act (wholly amended by Act No. 8541, Jul. 23, 2007; hereinafter “former National Pension Act”) which provides for the right to receive the divided pension of the divorced spouse was enforced on January 1, 199, and the plaintiff and the intervenor shared consultation prior to the enforcement date.
Since the creation of entitlement to a divided pension is retroactively limited to the property right of the divorced spouse who is a beneficiary of an old-age pension, the marriage period among the requirements for entitlement to a divided pension shall be limited to the marriage period after January 1, 1999.
However, the plaintiff and the intervenor are already divorced and there is no marriage period, which is the requirement for receiving the divided pension after January 1, 1999, so the intervenor is not the beneficiary of the divided pension.
Therefore, it is true.