logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.10.27 2016구합4102
분할연금소급지급에따른환수결정처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 1, 199, the Plaintiff subscribed to the National Pension Scheme as a self-employed insured on April 1, 199, and became a beneficiary of the special old age pension on July 2, 2006 and was paid special old age pension since August 2006.

B. On February 6, 2013, the Plaintiff divorced from B, and B applied for a divided pension to the Defendant on December 14, 2015.

C. The Defendant determined that B met the requirements for receiving divided pension under Article 64 of the National Pension Act, and decided to pay divided pension on December 15, 2015 with respect to B on February 6, 2013.

After that, the Defendant decided to revise the amount of the special old age pension for the Plaintiff according to the decision to pay the divided pension for B, and notified on December 23, 2015 that KRW 2,595,490 that the special old age pension paid to B was recovered retroactively from among the special old age pension paid to the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) e.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a request for review against the Defendant on January 21, 2016, but the Defendant dismissed it on February 29, 2016, and the Plaintiff again filed a request for reexamination with the National Pension Review Committee, but the said Committee dismissed it on May 2, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The head of the Plaintiff’s assertion has provided the Plaintiff, who is a basic livelihood security recipient, with the national pension benefits after deducting the national pension benefits. The Defendant’s recovery of the national pension benefits retroactively results in the Plaintiff’s failure to receive the same amount of the national pension benefits, and the Plaintiff has no economic ability to pay the amount of recovery.

Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. According to Article 64 of the National Pension Act, if a person who has been married for at least five years meets the requirements for entitlement to a divided pension, he/she may receive the divided pension from the time. According to Article 57, the National Pension Service erroneously paid the benefits.

arrow