The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff, including expenses incurred by supplementary participation.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except to add the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the

2. 이 법원에서 고쳐쓰는 부분 ▣ 제1심판결서 제3쪽 제9행의 “상고한 상태이다.”를 “상고하였으나, 2017. 8. 31. 상고가 기각되었다(이하 ‘관련 판결’이라 한다).”로 고친다.

▣ 제1심판결서 제3쪽 제14행부터 제15행까지에 있는 [인정 근거]란에 “갑 제25호증”을 추가한다.

▣ 제1심판결서 제5쪽 제16행부터 제21행까지에 있는 괄호 부분[제16행의 “(다만”부터 제21행의 “판단한다)”까지]을 삭제한다.

▣ 제1심판결서 제6쪽 제4행부터 제7행까지를 아래와 같이 고친다.

(2) Article 3(1)4 of the Military Pension Act defines a person who was a soldier as a bereaved family member at the time of his/her death. According to Article 53-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Military Pension Act and Article 3(1) [Attachment 1] of the Enforcement Decree of the Military Pension Act, where a person who was a soldier is registered in the certificate concerning the matters of family relationship “where he/she is registered in the certificate concerning the criteria for recognition of support for a spouse of a person who was a soldier, it shall not be deemed that the Defendant violated the law by recognizing that the intervenor who was

3. The plaintiff in this court's additional decision in this court requires protection equivalent to a legal divorce even in a de facto marriage, if there are special circumstances such as "(i) even if a de facto marital relationship is a de facto marital relationship, there is a need for protection equivalent to a de facto marital relationship. It is based on the support relationship, the period of stay, and the existence of efforts to recover the marital relationship.