beta
Text
1. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff (Appointed Party; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) is the representative of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) and is between the appointed party B (hereinafter “Appointed”) and the couple, and the Plaintiff and the appointed party filed a report to the Defendant that the Plaintiff et al. works in the instant company.
B. On June 20, 2016, the Defendant imposed health insurance fees of KRW 1,810,580 on the Plaintiff on the ground that the instant company cannot be deemed a place of business prescribed by the National Health Insurance Act, on the ground that the Plaintiff, etc. constitutes a locally provided policyholder who is not an employment provided policyholder under the National Health Insurance Act (i.e., settlement insurance premium of KRW 1,803,560) (i.e., monthly insurance premium of KRW 7,234,390 (i.e., settlement insurance premium of KRW 7,010,890) (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
C. The Defendant, and the Plaintiff’s above on September 14, 2017.
1,973,520 won including 1,810,580 won and arrears 162,940 won and 7,885,470 won including 7,234,390 won and arrears 651,080 won on May 2, 2017.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Eul's evidence Nos. 1 through 8, purport of the whole pleadings
2. As to the Plaintiff’s assertion on June 20, 2016, the Defendant asserted against the Plaintiff, etc.
1.(b)
As indicated in Paragraph 1, the instant disposition was imposed on the Plaintiff, etc., but the Plaintiff, etc. failed to receive the notice of health insurance premium imposed by the Defendant; ② the instant company operated normally by the Plaintiff, etc.; ③ the Plaintiff, etc. constitutes an employment provided policyholder, not an employment provided policyholder; ③ the Defendant changed the Plaintiff’s qualification as an employment provided policyholder to an individually provided policyholder; ④ the Defendant did not undergo a hearing procedure with respect to the Plaintiff, etc.; ④ the Defendant pressured the Plaintiffs, etc. to the effect that the Plaintiff, etc. would seize the Plaintiff, etc. while imposing the notice of health