[1] The purport that Article 3 (1) 4 of the Military Pension Act includes "a person in a de facto marital relationship" in his/her spouse entitled to a survivor pension

[2] In a case where a de facto marital relationship becomes a normal de facto marital relationship due to the death of the legal spouse, whether a person in a de facto marital relationship after the death of the legal spouse can be seen as a spouse under Article 3(1)4(a) of the Military Pension Act (affirmative)

[1] In light of the legal system of our family law, which provides the principle of prohibition of legal marriage and heavy marriage as Daejeon, the purport of Article 3(1)4 of the Military Pension Act, which includes “a person in a de facto marital relationship” as a spouse entitled to a survivor pension, is to protect the spouse in a case where a person has the substance of marriage by carrying out marital life, but is not recognized as a legal marriage due to the absence of a report of marriage, not to protect the de facto marital relationship in conflict with the legal marriage.

[2] Even if our legal system adopts a partial one-day immigration principle to prohibit double marriage, since the time of violation is not stipulated as the grounds for nullity of marriage, and only the grounds for annulment of marriage exist (Article 816 of the Civil Code), it remains effective until the revocation of a marriage falling under the middle marriage, and this does not change from the time of a de facto marital marriage. Therefore, even if a de facto marital marital status is a de facto marital status, if there are special circumstances, such as where a spouse of a soldier or a veteran who was a soldier was at the age of 61 before his/her retirement and at the same time his/her normal de facto marital status was dissolved at the time of his/her death, a person who was in a de facto marital relationship after the death of the former spouse shall be deemed the spouse provided for in Article 3(1)4 of the Military Pension Act.

[1] Article 3 (1) 4 (a) of the Military Pension Act / [2] Article 3 (1) 4 (a) of the Military Pension Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 93Nu1497 delivered on July 27, 1993 (Gong1993Ha, 2434) Supreme Court Decision 2006Du18584 Delivered on February 22, 2007 (Gong2007Sang, 511)

Plaintiff (Law Firm Dongdong, Attorneys Park Jong-soo et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

The Minister of National Defense

Seoul High Court Decision 2009Nu28980 decided April 15, 2010

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. In light of our family law system under which the principle of legal divorce and the principle of prohibition of heavy marriage are Daejeon, the purport of Article 3(1)4 of the Military Pension Act’s Article 3(1) includes “a person in a de facto marital relationship” in a spouse entitled to a survivor pension is to protect the spouse in a case where the person has the substance of marriage by carrying out marital life, but is not recognized as a legally marital relationship due to the absence of a report of marriage, or not to protect the de facto marital relationship in competition with the legal divorce (see Supreme Court Decisions 93Nu1497, Jul. 27, 1993; 2006Du18584, Feb. 22, 2007).

However, even if our legal system adopts a partial friendism and prohibits middle marriage, the time of violation is not stipulated as a ground for nullity of marriage, and only a ground for annulment of marriage exists (Article 816 of the Civil Act). This is not different from that of a de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto. Therefore, even if a de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto de facto, a person in a de facto marital relationship after the death of the former spouse should be deemed the spouse provided for in Article 3(1)4 of the Military Pension

2. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the reasoning of the first instance judgment partially admitted by the lower court, the lower court acknowledged the facts as indicated in its reasoning after comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence. On April 28, 1962, the deceased, who was a soldier, had been under legal divorce between the Nonparty and the Nonparty until the Non-Party died on December 4, 1996 after having reported a marriage with the Non-Party on April 28, 196, and thus, the deceased and the Plaintiff living together with the deceased, who resided in around 1980 and gave birth to both children and operated Taekwondo painting, cannot be legally protected as the so-called “so-called “so-called “so-called de facto de facto de facto marital marriage” and thus, insofar as the relationship between the deceased and the Plaintiff had already continued to have a de facto de facto marital relationship, the lower court determined that the above “ de facto de facto de facto de facto marital relationship” was under the premise that the legal divorce between the deceased and the Non-Party was dissolved at the same time, and thus becomes subject to legal protection.

In light of the above legal principles, relevant statutes, and records, such determination by the lower court is justifiable. In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on a spouse under Article 3(1)4 of the Military Pension Act as otherwise alleged in the grounds of

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Min Il-young (Presiding Justice)