1. The claimant for payment of deposit money of KRW 187,29,420 of the deposit money of KRW 1298 shall be entitled to the Busan District Court's East Branch.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 20, 2017, the deceased C (hereinafter “the deceased”)’s crew members of D (29 tons fishing vessels, vessel E) were on board the said D and departing from the Seoposi Port on July 20, 2017. On the same day, the deceased was missing at approximately 6 nautical miles at the ethm from the ethm from the eth of the eth of the eth of the eth of the eth of the eth of the eth of the eth of the eth of the eth of the eth of the eth of the eth of the eth of the e

B. The defendant completed the marriage report with the deceased on January 9, 1980.

C. On August 10, 2018, the F organization deposited an insurance benefit of KRW 187,299,420 (hereinafter “instant insurance benefit”) to be paid pursuant to the Fishing Vessels and Fishing Vessels Accident Compensation Insurance Act (hereinafter “the Fishing Vessels Disaster Insurance Act”) due to the deceased’s death in the course of performing his/her duties (hereinafter “instant insurance benefit”) with the Defendant who is a spouse under the law of the deceased or the Plaintiff who is a de facto spouse of the deceased as a de facto spouse of the deceased as a depositee (hereinafter “the instant deposit”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 4 through 12, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a de facto spouse who has maintained a de facto marital relationship with the deceased from around 2001 until the deceased died.

On the other hand, the defendant went out of around 1981, which was married one year, and lived with other persons from that time until the deceased died, etc., in fact, they were in a divorce status.

Therefore, the first beneficiary of the instant insurance benefit is the Plaintiff, and thus, the right to claim the payment of the instant insurance benefit is the Plaintiff.

B. The defendant alleged that the defendant was in a separate state with the deceased, and thus, the defendant is a legal spouse who is the first beneficiary of the insurance benefits of this case.

The plaintiff was a decedent of the deceased.

Even if it conflicts with the legal marriage relationship with the defendant, it can be seen as a "person who was in a de facto marital relationship" as provided in the Seafarers Disaster Insurance Act.