The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the part on the claim to revoke the determination that constitutes a person of distinguished service to the State

A. In order to recognize the person who died on duty as “the person who died on duty” under Article 4(1)5 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Services to the State (hereinafter “the Act”), there is only a proximate causal relation between the performance of duties or education and training and the death of the soldier, etc., and the death should be the main reason for the performance of duties or education and training directly related to national security or the

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Du46994, Jul. 27, 2016). (B)

Based on evidence, the lower court acknowledged that: (a) the deceased, who was the Plaintiff, was on duty on April 5, 2012 to June 29, 2012 while serving in the Army; (b) was dispatched to the 5th Army Group E and served as F on June 11, 2012; (c) an emergency situation occurred in the Gun Zone adjacent to the 5th Army Team; (d) the deceased was called up for two-day emergency duty hours from June 11, 2012 to June 15, 2012; (b) the deceased was waiting for two-day emergency duty hours while driving on duty on June 17, 2012; (c) the deceased was on duty on duty on duty on duty on duty on duty on behalf of the deceased; (d) the deceased was on duty on his/her own after being on duty on duty at around 20: (c) the deceased’s after being on duty on his/her own after being on duty on his/her night 20 days after his/her death.

On the premise of these facts, the lower court, on the premise of these facts, intended to provide meals to the cafeterias in the military unit at about 20:0,00, when the Deceased’s view that took a night duty at night.