군 사망·부상사고 발생 시 지원제도 및 개선에 관한 소고 -­ 법령을 중심으로 -

Military organizations by their very nature use a wide variety of weapons and equipment, while operating in harsh working conditions and a hierarchical culture based on a rigid command-and-submission system. These structural characteristics cause significant service stress for service members and inevitably lead to structural vulnerabilities that expose them to various accidents. Therefore, the best approach to protecting the health and lives of military personnel is to prevent accidents, but in reality, it is difficult to completely eliminate the possibility of accidents. As a result, the remediation process after an accident occurs is just as important as prevention. Legal and administrative remedies for death and injury in the course of military service are provided through a compensation and honor system, and the relevant laws include the Military Personnel Act, the Military Personnel Compensation Act, the National Meritorious Person Act, and the Veterans Compensation Act. These laws are established according to their respective purposes and scope of application, but to ensure the effectiveness of the system, systematic harmonization among them is required. In particular, consistency of terminology and linkage of interpretation between laws is the starting point for providing predictability for system users. Currently, the concepts of "Killed in Action". “death in the line of duty” “injury in the line of duty” and “Military casualty” used in the Military Personnel Act share similar conceptual categories as “fallen soldier” and “heroic soldier” in the National Heroes Act, but there are inconsistencies in the use and definition of these terms. This has resulted in different legal statuses and different paths to redress for the same death or injury. These inconsistencies can be confusing for bereaved families and parties, and can lead to mistrust of the remedy process. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure that relevant terms are linked and that interlocking standards are clearly established to provide parties with sufficient predictability and institutional stability. In addition, the examination process under the National Meritorious Person Act relies on the results of the Military Personnel Act or the Military Workers' Compensation Act to determine whether death or injury occurred in the course of military service. However, in the current system, the results of these prior examinations are sometimes not clearly linked or sufficiently reflected, leading to criticism that consistent standards and reliable procedures are lacking. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen the overall screening process and secure linkages. In particular, Article 54(2) of the Military Personnel Act, newly enacted in 2020, is considered a positive step forward by shifting the burden of proof to the state by deeming soldiers who die in the line of duty to be “deemed to have died in the line of duty.” This marks a turning point in the protection of rights by shifting the burden of proof from the family to the state. However, there are still ambiguities regarding the specific requirements and interpretation of the provision, which need to be clarified and the system needs to be overhauled. Ultimately, responding to deaths and injuries in military service is not just a matter of compensation, but of state responsibility to protect the rights of victims and their families through institutional consistency and legal clarity. This will require harmonizing terminology and procedures across laws and regulations, and promoting effective institutional improvements.