logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.12.05 2018누41374
유족연금 승계 불가처분 취소 등
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. On April 7, 2017, the Defendant’s refusal to succeed to the survivor pension that the Plaintiff rendered to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. B (E) died on January 11, 2012 while receiving the retirement pension as a beneficiary of the retirement pension under the Public Officials Pension Act (hereinafter “B”), and D, the wife of the deceased, was wholly amended by Act No. 15523, Jan. 25, 2012 to the Defendant on January 25, 2012, the former Public Officials Pension Act was amended by Act No. 15523, Mar. 20, 2018.

Article 56(1)1 of the former Public Officials Pension Act (amended by Act No. 11488, Oct. 22, 2012; hereinafter “former Public Officials Pension Act”) has filed an application for succession to a survivor pension and has received the survivor pension until now.

B. On March 29, 2017, the Plaintiff (FF) filed an application for succession to a survivor pension (hereinafter “instant application”) on the ground that he/she was the deceased’s child with the third degree of mental disorder, but on April 7, 2017, the Defendant rendered a provisional disposition on the ground that “the instant application was filed after the lapse of the five-year extinctive prescription period under Article 81(1) of the former Public Officials Pension Act” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for review on the instant disposition with the Public Official Pension Benefit Review Committee, but the said Review Committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for review on June 15, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 4, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The instant disposition premised on the completion of extinctive prescription of the Plaintiff’s entitlement to a survivor pension should be revoked on the following grounds.

1) “The right to receive benefits” requiring the five-year extinctive prescription pursuant to Article 81 of the former Public Officials Pension Act refers to a specific right to claim monetary payment, and the status of receiving the future survivor’s pension by proving that the Defendant is a bereaved family member cannot be deemed as having contracted extinctive prescription. (2) The Plaintiff, a parent of the deceased, has a three-class mental disorder.

arrow