beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.06.12 2017누84077

장기요양급여비용 환수처분 취소

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasons why this court’s disposition is stated are as follows: (a) entry of “the details and details of the disposition” in Article 1(1) of the judgment of the court of first instance (Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act; (b) and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Part II of the former Notice on Expenses for Long-Term Care Benefits, Etc. (wholly amended by the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 2014-97, Jun. 26, 2014) where two or more caregivers are forced to participate in the body cleaning machine in the first week visit bathing, which is the basis for the instant disposition, is unconstitutional or invalid (a summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion)

Ⅱ 5. Article 2 Section 1 Section 3(b) of the former Notice (wholly amended by the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 2015-202, Nov. 25, 2015) on the criteria for providing long-term care benefits and methods of calculating expenses for long-term care benefits deviates from the scope delegated to the public notice of the Act and the Enforcement Rule of the Act on Long-Term Care Insurance for Older Persons and the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, which are superior statutes, and thus, violates the Constitution by infringing on the privacy, freedom, and general personal rights of beneficiaries

B) According to Article 26(2) of the former Notice on Standards for Provision of Long-Term Care Benefits and Methods of Calculating Expenses for Long-Term Care Benefits (amended by the Ministry of Health and Welfare Notice No. 2015-202, Nov. 25, 2015) stating, “If more than two caregivers fail to provide bathing, all expenses for long-term care benefits shall not be calculated,” the Defendant violated the principle of proportionality to ensure that expenses for long-term care benefits are not calculated uniformly without distinguishing the provision of long-term care benefits from the provision of long-term care benefits and the provision of the said Notice, and goes beyond the scope delegated by the superior law.