Whether Article 36 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, which provides the principle of attachment priority, applies mutatis mutandis to national pension premiums and industrial accident compensation insurance premiums (negative)

Article 79(3) of the National Pension Act provides that with respect to the collection of national pension contributions and other amounts to be collected under the National Pension Act, Article 74(1) of the former Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (amended by Act No. 7049 of Dec. 31, 2003) provides that the collection of industrial accident compensation insurance premiums shall follow the examples of disposition on default of national taxes after obtaining approval from the Minister of Health and Welfare or the Minister of Labor. In light of the language and form of the provision, each of the above provisions provides that the national pension contributions and industrial accident compensation insurance fees have the right to enforce the collection of national pension contributions and industrial accident compensation insurance fees in accordance with the procedures for disposition on default as stipulated in Chapter 3 of the National Tax Collection Act, and it is difficult to view that Article 36 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Article 36 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, Article 79(3) of the National Pension Act, Article 74(1) of the former Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (amended by Act No. 7049 of Dec. 31, 2003)

National Pension Management Corporation

Korea Labor Welfare Corporation

Busan District Court Decision 2003Na12745 delivered on July 23, 2004

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Article 81 of the National Pension Act provides that "the priority order of collection of pension premiums and other dues under this Act shall be the same as that of national and local taxes under the National Health Insurance Act." The main sentence of Article 73 of the National Health Insurance Act provides that "the insurance premiums, etc. shall be collected in preference to other claims except national and local taxes." Article 76 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act provides that "the priority order of collection of pension premiums and other dues under this Act is next to national and local taxes." Thus, the priority order of collection of pension premiums and collection of industrial accident compensation insurance premiums is the same as that of national and local taxes.

Meanwhile, Article 36 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that "if a taxpayer's property is seized by a disposition on default of national taxes, if other national taxes, additional dues, disposition on default, or local taxes are requested to be provided, the national taxes, additional dues, disposition on default, and disposition on default related to the seizure shall be collected in preference to other national taxes, additional dues, disposition on default, and local taxes requested to be provided," and Paragraph (2) of the same Article provides that "if a taxpayer's property is seized by a disposition on default of local taxes, the national taxes, additional dues, and disposition on default requested to be provided shall be collected in the order following the local taxes related to the seizure, the national taxes, additional dues, and disposition on default requested to be provided shall be collected in the order following the local taxes related to the seizure."

However, Article 79(3) of the National Pension Act provides that with respect to the collection of national pension contributions and other amounts to be collected under the National Pension Act, Article 74(1) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act provides that the collection of industrial accident compensation insurance premiums shall follow the examples of disposition on default of national taxes after obtaining approval from the Minister of Health and Welfare or from the Minister of Labor. In light of the language and text of the above provision or the form of the law, each of the above provisions merely provides that the national pension contributions and industrial accident compensation insurance fees have the right of self-performance to collect national pension premiums and industrial accident compensation insurance fees in accordance with the procedure of disposition on default as stipulated in Chapter III of the National Tax Collection Act (see Supreme Court Decision 89Meu17898 delivered on March 9, 190), it is difficult to view that Article 36 of the Framework Act

According to the reasoning of the first instance judgment maintained by the court below, the court below acknowledged the facts as stated in its reasoning after compiling the adopted evidence, and determined that the defendant is liable to return the amount distributed in excess of the dividend procedure to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment on the ground that Article 79 (3) of the National Pension Insurance Act and Article 74 (1) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act provide that the collection procedure of national pension contributions and industrial accident compensation insurance premiums shall follow the example of the disposition of national tax in arrears as provided by the National Tax Collection Act with regard to the collection procedure of national pension contributions and industrial accident compensation insurance premiums, and that Article 36 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, which provides that the national pension contributions and industrial accident compensation insurance fees shall not apply mutatis mutandis between the national pension contributions and the industrial accident compensation insurance fees pursuant to each of the above provisions.

Examining the relevant evidence in light of the above legal principles and records, we affirm the above recognition and judgment of the court below, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the application of the principle of attachment priority as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.

The Supreme Court precedents cited in the grounds of appeal are inappropriate to be invoked in the instant case with different contents from the case.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Hong-hoon (Presiding Justice)