Kwonikwi: "Recovery of Veterans' Benefits from Daughter-in-Law is Unfair"

An administrative adjudication decision has ruled that it was wrong to impose the recovery of overpaid veterans’ benefits, which were paid to the senior surviving family members of independence patriots, on a daughter-in-law who is not a legal heir under the law.

On the 31st, the Central Administrative Adjudication Committee of the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission canceled the Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs’ decision to recover benefits from the daughter-in-law after the senior surviving family member who had received the benefit recovery order passed away. The “Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons of Distinguished Service to the State” stipulates that benefits are to be paid to one senior surviving family member among the survivors of an independence patriot. However, if the person who received the benefits was registered by false or fraudulent means, or if the rights disappear retroactively to the time of registration after receiving the benefits, the paid benefits can be recovered within five years.

When the biological child who had been registered as the senior surviving family member of the independence patriot died in 2007, the Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs, ex officio, designated Mr. A, who was confirmed to be a child of the independence patriot, as the senior surviving family member and paid benefits. However, when a ruling in 2020 found that there was no biological relationship between Mr. A and the independence patriot, the Ministry canceled Mr. A’s registration as the senior surviving family member and ordered the recovery of the benefits paid to him.

After Mr. A died in 2022 and three months later his son, who was the legal heir, also passed away, the Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs imposed the benefit recovery order on Mr. A’s daughter-in-law, Ms. B. Ms. B filed an administrative adjudication claiming that “the benefits received by Mr. A fall under the exemption from return, and the Ministry’s decision is illegal and unjust.” The Central Administrative Adjudication Committee ruled that Ms. B does not qualify as a “legal heir of the benefit recipient,” and thus the Ministry’s decision was illegal.

Park Jong-min, Vice Chairman of the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission and Chairman of the Central Administrative Adjudication Committee, stated, “Even if recovering benefits paid to an unqualified person aligns with the public interest, imposing recovery orders on persons who are not legal heirs under the law violates the constitutional principle of personal responsibility. We will continue to make efforts to prevent infringement of citizens’ rights and interests through illegal or unjust cases.”

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.