생활보호제도와 사적부양제도의 합리적 조정

片桐由喜(Katagiri, Yuki) 한국사회보장법학회 2013 사회보장법학 Vol.2 No.2

복지국가를 지향하는 하는 많은 나라들은 국민에게 건강하고 문화적인 최저한도의 생활을 보장하는 책임을 지며, 그 목적을 위해 사회보장입법을 하고, 제도를 정비·발전시킨다. 한편, 복지국가의 기본이념으로서는 국민 자신의 생활이 어려울 때 스스로 해결할 수 없다면 사회보장제도에 의지하기 전에 가족, 즉 사적인 부양으로 생계를 유지해야 한다. 그러나 가족기능이 저하되고, 가족 간의 부양의식도 이전과 비교하였을 때 크게 변화한 시점에서는 사적부양이 공적인 부양에 우선적으로 적용될 수 있는 시스템을 기반으로 한 제도의 설계 역시 검토되어야 한다. 이러한 재검토에 있어서는 생존권을 규정한 헌법 25조뿐만 아니라 개인의 존엄을 보장하는 헌법 13조 역시 고려하면서 사적부양과 공적부양의 관계를 생각할 필요가 있다. The Welfare states in modern society have liability for their nation to give the minimum standard of living based on law. To carry out this task, the states have made and developed social security laws. On the other hand, as the philosophy of welfare states, there are idea of self-help or self-responsibility, therefore we are, of course, required to manage our life by our efforts. It means that when we are in want but cannot maintain our life by ourselves, we have to make use of family support before depending on national social security system. However, it need to rethink such an idea because family has less power to help each other than before. In addition, the sense of support among family has also widely changed now. Rethinking the priority between public assistance and family support, it is very important to put into view not only §25 of Japanese Constitution, that article refers the right of life, but also §13, which declares the nation shall be respected as individuals.

주택보장제도의 현대적 과제

片桐由喜 ( Katagiri Yuki ) 아세아여성법학회 2021 아세아여성법학 Vol.24 No.-

Housing is the base of human life. Nevertheless, we highly depend on private sector, that is the companies or families, for the housing. Because the public responsibility, which means Governmental responsibility, for housing is not sufficient. By the way, as of 2021, many workers are suffering from reduced income or unemployment due to restraining the economic activities forced to prevent infection with the COVID-19. Now, due to reduced income or unemployment, some have lost or are at risk of losing their homes but have not received sufficient housing benefit from public sector. And by (thanks to) COVID-19, we noticed the weakness of public housing benefit in Japan. In the future, it will be necessary to strengthen public involvement in housing supply and develop a universal housing benefit.

공적연금제도의 공정한 부담 ―새로운 노동스타일에 대한 대응―

片桐由喜 ( Katagiri Yuki ) 아세아여성법학회 2017 아세아여성법학 Vol.20 No.-

The Japanese public pension system makes up for a drop of the ability for family support now. Therefore the system take a very important role as the income security for, especially, the old age. Person insured qualification varies according to an occupation; Self-employed workers, employees, and their dependents. In addition, the insured qualification also depend on regular employees or non-regular employees, married or unmarried, and annual income. Against such a system, the criticism that this is an unfair design as the public system exists for a long time. By the way, recently, not for living, a new style of working for social contribution and/or exerting the best of their abilities has appeared, that is activity at the organization, Workers’ Collective. This organization doesn’t seek to make a profit. They aim to provide vulnerable groups, the aged, children and disabled, in their community with service by the price lower than market price. For example, the kind of services is a baby-sitter, food delivery and so on. Now the government wants the directors of Workers’ Collective to pay the pension premiums on the reason that they get the reward for working at the organizations. But the directors of Workers’ Collective assert that they are not employees in general, but are the same as the dependents of employees. These features are unique to Public Pension System in Japan. In other words, people can choice more profitable qualification for them. Such a situation cause to feel lack of impartial and neutral. In this paper, I will overview the outline of Japanese Public Pension System and look at way what the System should be.

公的年金制度之女性-中立、公正な制度設計に向けて-

편동유희 ( Yuki Katagiri ) 아세아여성법학회 2015 아세아여성법학 Vol.18 No.-

Japanese public pension is called two layers structure, Basic pension is at the first layer, and Employees` pension is at the second layer. And we, every people of working-age population shall be an insured person of National pension and receive a Basic Pension. Additionally, private and public employees shall join Employees` pension and receive pension, which are supplemental to the National Pension, In National Pension, insured person is classified into three categories. Category-1 insured persons are self-employed persons, farmer, students over 20 years old and so on. Category-2 is Employees of private and public sector. And Category-3 is Spouses of Category-2, 99% of them are wives. So, today, in my presentation, Category-3 means wife. Category-1 pays a fixed amount insurance and Category-2 pays proportional to their salary. But Category -3 is not required to pay insurance if she is maintained by her husbands. The condition of maintenance is whether her income is over one million three hundred thousand yen. On the other hand, wives of Category-1 have to pay her insurance, so, they have much complaint against such situation. Why we made Category-3 insured person? Before 1985, we have no Category-3 system. Then housewives could make a choice to join or not National pension. In 1985, 70% of wives joined pension system voluntarily. If she did not join pension system, husband could get additional pension added his own pension By 1985, Category-3 had started. Because then it was pointed as a social problem the old women were faced with poor, especially in case that they had divorced in old. When old couple divorced, husband lost only his additional pension, on the other hand, wife had no pension. Therefore it was needed housewives have right to get pension by her own name. And housewife had no or few income. As you know, it is Social insurance principle that, ‘no income, no contribution`. As a result, Category-3, wives, were given to status, no contribution, but benefit. Somebody talk as the background to introduce Category-3 as follows; that is, at first, thanks to house-wives, Japanese male could work very hard. Without housewives, they could not work outside and if male workers could not work hard, Japanese economy would be recession. It is said Category-3 is a kind of reward to wives. This is very unique in the world. In western society and Korean, and maybe Taiwan, for housewives, to join National Pension or not is their choice. If they don`t join National Pension, they don`t receive pension benefit. As I mentioned, Category-3 escape to pay insurance as far as their income is not over one million three hundred thousand. This is also distinctive pension policy with other country. In Europe and USA, when they get salary, they have to pay contribution in principle. Now, most housewives are working as part timer in Japan. Then, they control their income under bar so that they don`t pay insurance. This attitude helps to employer and company because they also escape their social insurance burden. As you know, all employers want to reduce personal cost. Social Insurance Contribution is one of the biggest personal costs. At a glance, as escaping to pay insurance, it seems to be good for wives. But in a long run, it may be disadvantage for them. Even though getting salary, to keep status of Category-3 means that they are not entitled to Category-2. In another word, housewives who work as part-timers cannot get second layer pension. Therefore Category-3 is criticized to keep female working condition low level and prevent to receive the second layer pension benefit. Lastly, I would like to tell the fairness and neutrality of public pension. Category-3 has been causing social conflict from beginning, especially between women. In this case, key word is fairness and neutrality in public pension. At first, as mentioned before, wives of category-1 claims to unfairness because they are category-1 and have to pay insurance, but category-3`s wife does not. They says it is unfair. On the other hand, full time working woman, category-2 Insured Person, also complains it`s unfair housewives don`t pay insurance thought they get income. Especially in the case that Category-2 women receive salary at the similar level of Category -3`s income. In addition, single mother complains strongly against Category-3 system. Because even though their salary is under one million three hundred thousand yen, they have to pay insurance because they have no husband. In Japan, we have discussed for a long time about Category-3 issue in parliament, public agency and women`s organization. But there has been no change still now. Social security system including pension system must be fair and neutral, if not, the system would lose the confidence. Needless to say, Category-3 helps housewife to get pension by her own name. But which is more important, this merit for housewives or value of the fairness and neutrality in? I think the value is more important and there is some ways to consider for female caring family, children and the older. We should ensure fairness and confidence in Social Security system.

일본 진료수가 결정 체계 분석을 통한 한국에의 정책적 시사점: 국민의료비 억제 기전 중심

김정덕 ( Jung Duck Kim ),강민진 ( Min Jin Kang ),김도훈 ( Do Hoon Kim ),최영순 ( Yong Soon Choi ),편동유희 ( Yuki Katagiri ) 한국사회보장학회 2015 사회보장연구 Vol.31 No.2

Health Insurance Financing(HIF) of Korea is supposed to be unsubstantiality. Because revenue factors of HIF have been decreasing due to low fertility, whereas expenditure factors of HIF have been increasing due to aging & chronic disease. But as we had experienced controversial issue related to ‘tax increase’ at the second half of 2014, there is no alternative to financing for health insurance by raising health insurance premium. Therefore, in a given situation, the HIF spending structure reforms would be a contributory initiative. Among the aging & chronic disease - developed countries, Japan’s HIF indicators relatively had better performances than Korea through managing fee schedule revision system as a tool for health expenditure controlling mechanism. According to such a result, Korea and Japan are similar to revenue factors of HIF, Korea and Japan are different in expenditure factors of HIF. The implications for Korea through analyzing Japan’s medical fee schedule revision system as follows. First, Korea must review to introduce the strategy for driving macro-economic efficiency. Second, Korea must review to introduce the strategy for driving micro-economic efficiency.