1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. B was a person who participated in the Korean War around September 1950 and was dead on September 13, 1950 on a certified copy of the Korean War.

B. The plaintiff was adopted on January 23, 1964 as the birth in 1958 by the deceased B.

C. On May 7, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for registration of bereaved families with the Defendant on the ground that he/she is a deceased soldier who falls under Article 4(1)3 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “Act on the Honorable Treatment of Persons of Distinguished Services to the State”).

Accordingly, on May 15, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision that the deceased deceased person B’s death date in the Army Headquarters on September 7, 1950 (in the case of a certified copy of the register of removal, September 13, 1950), and notified the Plaintiff of this decision on January 13, 1990 on the ground that it cannot be a bereaved family member or a family member under Article 5 of the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State, on the ground that the Plaintiff, who was adopted on January 23, 1960 after the deceased person’s death on January 13, 199, was abolished by the Civil Act amendment, and thus, cannot be a bereaved family member or a family member under the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “instant

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 6, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

6. 25. 25. The enforcement date of the Guidelines for the Management of Missing Persons A (No. 1) was February 27, 1998. Accordingly, the deceased B was killed in action as of April 14, 1998. Thus, the date of death in action in action in action in action in the deceased B constitutes January 1, 1999.

Therefore, even if the plaintiff is not an ex post facto supporter, the defendant's disposition of this case is unlawful on different premise.

B. Regarding the scope of children included in the bereaved family members and family members of a person who rendered distinguished services to the State, the former Act on Honorable Treatment, etc. of Persons of Distinguished Services to the State, which was amended by Act No. 4457 of Dec. 27, 1991, includes a person of distinguished services to the State who was married under Article 5(2) of the Act on Honorable Treatment, etc. of Persons of Distinguished

only one person.