1. The part concerning the conjunctive claim in the first instance judgment shall be revoked.

2. The Defendant limited to the Plaintiff on September 1, 2015.

Details of the disposition

On March 30, 1990, B, who is the husband of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the deceased”), was appointed as a police officer on March 30, 199, and on January 21, 2014, while serving as the chief of the C police station of the Chungcheongnam-nam Police Agency, he was found to have been deceased from the official residence on March 3, 2014 as a acute funeral from the official residence on March 30, 2014.

On May 15, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the State for registration as a bereaved family member or bereaved family member of a person who has rendered distinguished services to the State, alleging that the deceased is a person eligible for veteran’s compensation falling under the “person who has rendered distinguished services to the State” or “the Act on Support for Persons Eligible for Veteran’s Compensation” (hereinafter “the Act on Veterans’ Compensation”) under the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State.

On January 9, 2015, after deliberation and resolution by the Board of Patriots and Veterans Entitlement prescribed in the Act on Persons of Distinguished Services to the State, the Defendant rendered a decision non-conforming to the requirements for persons of distinguished services to the State and persons of distinguished services to the State on the ground that “the deceased died or died rapidly due to his/her performance of duties or education and training directly related to national defense or security, or to the protection of the lives and property of the people, or his/her performance of duties or education and training which are not directly related to national defense or security, or to the protection of the lives and property of the people, or it is not determined that he/she died rapidly due to the rapid aggravation of the outbreak

(hereinafter) The determination of whether a person was not eligible for distinguished service to the State constitutes “instant Disposition 1” and “instant Disposition 2” and, in combination, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on April 8, 2015. However, on September 15, 2015, the Plaintiff’s performance of official duties by the Central Administrative Appeals Commission.