The instant lawsuit was terminated by the Plaintiff’s death on October 25, 2020.

Judgment ex officio is made.

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 7, the plaintiff was killed due to a vehicle returned to a gathering place after obtaining a writ of convening a war of June 25, 2020, which is his/her spouse, (hereinafter "the deceased") on or around May 202, after obtaining a writ of convening a war of June 25, 200.

The defendant filed an application for registration of a person of distinguished service to the State. On September 23, 2020, the defendant rendered a decision that the deceased does not constitute a soldier or policeman on duty (hereinafter referred to as the "disposition in this case") under the Act on the Honorable Treatment of and Support for Persons of Distinguished Service to the State (hereinafter referred to as the "Act on Persons of Distinguished Service to the State"), and the plaintiff died on October 25, 2020, which was after the filing of the lawsuit in this case.

The right to be registered as a person of distinguished service to the State and his/her bereaved family members under the Act of Persons of Distinguished Service and to receive various kinds of benefits, such as educational benefits, is a right recognized as a person who satisfies the requirements prescribed by the Act and whose registration is determined by the decision of the head of the State Veterans Organization following deliberation by the

However, the right is not subject to inheritance in light of the following: (a) the right is a new right granted to an individual in order to promote the stability of his/her livelihood and the improvement of his/her welfare by providing honorable treatment for the persons of distinguished service to the State and their bereaved family members, and (b) the scope and precedence of the bereaved family members who receive compensation, etc. are separately provided (Article 19); and (c) the scope and precedence of the bereaved family members who receive a pension are separately provided (Articles 12 and 13). Therefore, the lawsuit in this case is not subject to inheritance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Du1262, Sept. 30, 2010). Therefore, there is no possibility that the lawsuit in this case was terminated simultaneously with the death of the Plaintiff and may not be succeeded by the Plaintiff’s heir.

Therefore, the plaintiff.