국민건강보험료에 대한 세법상 평등원칙의 적용

초록

The national health insurance contribution stipulated in the National Health Insurance Act is a compulsory levy which is levied in the same manner a tax is assessed. On the other hand it is also to be regarded as a consideration for the benefit of health insurance which comprises the social insurance system. A social insurance is an institution through which a society may pursue both the right of freedom and happiness and the solidarity based on the social state doctrine in a harmonized way. A social insurance is founded on the solidarity principle. While the balance between the service and the consideration under the equivalence principle has to be kept down to the level of individual for a private insurance, the mere balance among the solidarity group may suffice the equivalence requirement in case of a social insurance. The public medical care systems of the advanced countries are developing in the direction to expand the social solidarity. The social solidarity under the health insurance of this country is being broadened to a nationwide level overcoming the occupational and regional barriers. Both the equality principle for taxation and the equivalence principle for social insurance have to be applied in a harmonious way for the assessment of health insurance contribution. The equality principle for taxation needs to be amended by the equivalence principle for social insurance for the assessment of health insurance contribution. The equivalence principle is already reflected on the current rule for the assessment of health insurance contribution in the forms of the proportional rate of assessment and the cap on the contribution amount. In addition to those the system needs to be revised so that the same burden is allocated to the persons with the same economic ability according to the ability-to-pay rule. For both the occupational health insurance and the regional health insurance it is required that the dependent provision has to be abolished, the contribution has to be levied only on the income rather than on the property, and the cap on the contribution has to be set at the same amount for every insured person irrespective of his or her status. The provision for the contribution levied on the property, which helps the public medical finance very little, treats the insured in a discriminatory way. Therefore it needs to be abolished. If the revenue from such contribution may not be given up, we may think of an alternative method for the public medical finance to procure a portion of the revenue from either the property tax or the comprehensive real property tax.

키워드