[부당이득금반환][집36(2)민,161;공1988.11.1.(835),1327]
Whether the proviso of Article 35(1)3 of the Framework Act on National Taxes applies mutatis mutandis to the collection procedure of medical insurance premiums (negative)
In addition to the provisions of Articles 55(3) and 56 of the Medical Insurance Act, since there is no provision on the collection of medical insurance premiums, the National Tax Collection Act may apply mutatis mutandis to the collection procedure of medical insurance premiums, etc., however, Article 2 of the National Tax Collection Act does not require the proviso of Article 35(1)3 of the Framework Act on National Taxes or Article 31 subparag. 3 of the Local Tax Act.
Articles 55(3) and 56 of the Medical Insurance Act, proviso of Article 35(1)3 of the Framework Act on National Taxes
[Defendant-Appellee] Korea Exchange Bank Co., Ltd. and three others
Korea Maritime Medical Insurance Association
Seoul High Court Decision 86Na2596 delivered on January 14, 1987
The case shall be reversed and remanded to the Seoul High Court.
As to the Grounds of Appeal:
Medical insurance premiums and other money collectible under the Medical Insurance Act (hereinafter referred to as "medical insurance premiums, etc.") can be collected in the same manner as delinquent national taxes are collected if approval from the competent Minister is obtained pursuant to Article 55(3) of the Medical Insurance Act. As such, medical insurance premiums, etc. can be collected in the same manner as taxes are national taxes, Article 56 of the same Act provides that the order of collection of insurance premiums, etc. shall be next to national taxes and local taxes.
In addition, there is no provision on the collection of medical insurance premiums, so the National Tax Collection Act may apply mutatis mutandis to the collection procedure of medical insurance premiums in the same manner as delinquent national taxes are collected. Therefore, the National Tax Collection Act may apply mutatis mutandis to the collection procedure of medical insurance premiums, etc. under Article 2 of the National Tax Collection Act. However, the proviso of Article 35(1)3 of the Framework Act on National Taxes or Article 31(2)3 of the Local Tax Act shall not apply
The reason why the provisions are applied mutatis mutandis is that the order of collection of medical insurance premiums may take precedence over national taxes, local taxes, etc. according to the time of establishing the right of lease on a deposit basis, pledge, mortgage, etc. and the time of payment of national taxes, local taxes, medical insurance premiums, etc.
In this case, the lower court’s rejection of the Plaintiff’s claim on the premise that the proviso of Article 35(1)3 of the Framework Act on National Taxes shall also apply mutatis mutandis to the collection procedure of medical insurance premiums, etc. on the premise that the aforementioned provision of the Medical Insurance Act shall take precedence over the Plaintiff’s secured claim against the non-party company, and thus, shall be deemed to be erroneous in the pertinent provision of the Medical Insurance Act, and as such, the lower judgment shall not be exempt from reversal.
Therefore, the original judgment shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Justices Kim Yong-ju (Presiding Justice)