1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The deceased F (G students, hereinafter “the deceased”) is a deceased person in the course of performing the previous special duties.

B. On March 22, 2018, the Deceased Plaintiffs filed an application with the Defendant for the payment of compensation pursuant to Article 10 of the former Act on the Compensation for Persons who performed Special Military Missions (amended by Act No. 16360, Apr. 23, 2019; hereinafter “Special Child Compensation Act”) on the ground that they constitute persons who performed special military missions under Article 2(1)2 of the same Act.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant application”). C.

On March 27, 2018, the Defendant rendered a decision to dismiss the instant application on the ground that “The period of application is limited from January 19, 2016 to April 19, 2016, the enforcement date of this Act, by stating that an application for the payment of compensation, etc. should be filed within three months after this Act enters into force,” and thus, the Defendant rendered a decision to dismiss the instant application on the ground that the period of application was “the period of application was exceeded.”

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, entry in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 7 through 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. On the grounds delineated below, the instant disposition is unlawful.

1) First, the Plaintiffs are seeking the payment of compensation that was lawfully requested and confirmed within the period of application by the deceased, and in such a case, the provision on limitation on the period of application under the Special Child Compensation Act is not applicable. 2) Even if the provision on limitation on the period of application under the Special Child Compensation Act is applied to the instant application, if a legitimate application for compensation has already been made by another deceased’s bereaved family member, the effect of compliance can be deemed as applicable to the Plaintiffs. Accordingly, the instant application did not even apply to the period of application.

3 The defendant only provides H with guidance on the application for payment of compensation, and the plaintiffs provide guidance on the application for payment of compensation.