A. Background of the Case
In this case, the Constitutional Court held that Article 69 Section 5 and Article 72 Section 1 of the National Health Insurance Act under which such factors as property, etc. should be taken into account in addition to income when calculating and imposing insurance contributions for the self-employed insured (hereinafter referred to as the "Provisions on Self-Employed Insurance Contributions"), is not in violation of the Constitution.
Before this decision, the Constitutional Court had ruled that the dual imposition system, which sets different standards and methods of calculating insurance contributions between employees insured and self-employed insured, does not violate the constitutional principle of equality (refer to 99Hun-Ma289, June 29, 2000, and 2000Hun-Ma801, October 30, 2003), and thereafter ruled that the provisions of the National Health Insurance Act which are same as the Provisions on Self-Employed Insurance Contributions do not violate the Constitution in 2009Hun-Ma299 and 2010Hun-Ba51.
The petitioner filed a lawsuit seeking the cancellation of the disposition of the imposition of insurance contributions for the self-employed insured after his or her qualification was changed from an employee insured, and while the lawsuit was pending, motioned to request constitutional review of the Provisions on Self-Employed Insurance Contributions, and upon its rejection, filed this constitutional complaint.
B. Summary of the Decision
The Constitutional Court ruled that the Provisions on Self-Employed Insurance Contributions are not in violation of the Constitution, for the following reasons.
It cannot be determined as violating the principle of equality to bear the amount of insurance contribution on basically remuneration in the cases of employed workers, and on not only income but property, etc. in the cases of the self-employed insured, whose income is difficult to grasp, in order to guarantee the equality of burden of insurance contribution between the two groups, who differ in terms of income recognition rate and income type. Although the income recognition rate of the self-employed insured has become higher than before and the problems are continuously pointed out in the dependent system or the method of calculating the insurance contribution for low income earners with an annual income of five million won or less among the self-employed insured, and although conversion to a single imposition system based on income is being examined, the reorganization into a new premium system should be made to the extent that the financial stability of the insurance can be secured. However, supplementary measures for the insurance finance portion based on the property of the self-employed insured have not been definitely prepared, and since the irrationality of the current imposition method can be solved through the improvement of the partial and gradual improvements such as the revision of lower statutes, there is a rational reason to maintain the dual imposition system as of yet.
Justices Park Han-Chul, Lee Jung-Mi, Ahn Chang-Ho, and Cho Yong-Ho set forth an opinion of nonconformity to the Constitution on the grounds that the Provisions on Self-Employed Insurance Contributions run against the principle of equality, considering that the income recognition rate is generally higher than the rate at the time of financial integration of the national health insurance, and it is against the principle of social solidarity to calculate insurance contributions by additionally taking into account such factors as property, etc. when most of the self-employed insured who have no taxation data and whose incomes are difficult to grasp are jobless people or day workers, merely on the grounds of their low income recognition rate.
C. Aftermath of the Case
There has been controversy since the financial integration of the national health insurance in 1999 over whether it is equitable to maintain a dual imposition system between employees insured and the self-employed insured. Especially, following the suicide of a mother and two daughters who lived in Songpa-gu for reason of failing to pay public bills such as the national health insurance contributions, the method of calculating insurance contributions for the self-employed insured, to which economically disadvantaged groups belong, became a social problem. After this decision, the National Assembly made it clear in the amendment of the National Health Insurance Act by Act No. 14776 on April 18, 2017, that "persons whose income and property falls below the standards prescribed by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare" are eligible for dependents of the insured, and also modified the calculation basis of insurance contributions based on monthly income for employees insured to subtract an amount prescribed by Presidential Decree from income other than annual remuneration in calculating the insurance contributions based on monthly income, and to increase the rate of insurance contributions based on monthly income from 50% to 100% of the insurance contributions based on monthly remuneration. In particular, the Provisions for Self-Employed Insurance Contributions were amended so that only "income and property" would be used as the basis for calculating insurance contributions for the self-employed insured, instead of "income, property, standard of living, and the participation rate in economic activities." This was intended to abolish the appraised income that had been applied as the basis for calculating income-based insurance contributions for the self-employed insured, who are mainly low-income class with an annual income of no more than five million won, and the self-employed insured with an annual income of no more than five million won also became eligible for the application of insurance contributions calculated on the basis of global taxable income in calculating income-based insurance contributions, like the self-employed insured whose annual income is no less than five million won. In addition, for minors who do not have income or property and minors who meet the criteria prescribed by Presidential Decree in consideration of their income, property, etc., the duty to pay insurance contributions is exempted, and it is prescribed that such exemption also applies to insurance contributions which had been imposed before the amended Act entered into force but were in arrears as of the time the amended Act entered into force.