국민기초생활보장법상의 급여변경 및 중지절차의 적정성에 대한 법적 고찰 : 적법절차원칙의 적용

Legality of the Welfare Benefits Termination and Modification Procedure under the National Basic Living Security Act: Applying the Due Process of Law Principle

본 논문에서는 우리 헌법에서 수용하고 있는 적법절차원칙에 비추어, 현행 국민기초생활보장법에서 급여변경 및 중지시 적용되는 절차의 적정성을 고찰한다. 동법에서는 사후적인 이의신청절차만을 명시하고 있으며, 분쟁을 심사하는 심판자의 독립성을 보장하는 장치가 마련되지 않은 한계가 있다. 그 결과 수급자는 행정기관의 일방적인 조치에 의해 급여가 박탈되어 즉각적인 생계위협을 겪고, 구제절차에서도 공정한 심판을 받지 못하는 불이익을 당하기 쉽다. 급여의 변경 및 중지는 수급자의 헌법적 또는 법률적 권리를 제한하는 행정작용으로서 적법절차원칙에 따라 절차의 공정성과 합리성이 요구된다고 본다. 급여 변경 및 중지의 경우 적법절차를 만족하기 위해서는, 이의신청 기회가 해당 조치 시행 전에 마련되어야 하며, 심판자의 독립성이 적절한 수준에서 보장되고, 이 때 수급자가 심판자 앞에서 구두로 의견을 표현할 기회가 제공되는 등 절차적 보호장치가 마련되어야 한다. 이를 위해 행정절차법상의 청문절차를 적용하는 것이 적합하다고 보며, 이에 급여변경 또는 중지시 수급자의 청문에의 기회를 권리로서 보장하도록 국민기초생활보장법을 개정해야 한다고 주장한다.

The Korean government's recent large-scale termination and modification of welfare benefits revealed a procedural problem under the National Basic Living Security Act. Under the Act, welfare recipients have a legal right to make complaints only after the termination or modification is enforced; the Act fails to provide the recipients with an opportunity for a hearing before termination or modification, and this creates serious threats to the recipients, whose livelihoods are dependent on welfare benefits. Korean jurisprudence has adopted the due process of law principle. The principle originated from the due process in US jurisprudence, and Korea has applied it broadly to any government actions that restrict individuals' constitutional or legal rights. This paper reviews the termination or modification procedure under the Act with the lens of the due process principle and criticizes that the current law is not in compliance with the principle. In supporting that such termination and modification procedure infringes on welfare recipients' protected rights, this paper discusses two theories as to what rights are protected. First, termination or modification of welfare benefits can be considered as deprivation of property. The 'property' theory may be weak under Korean jurisprudence, because the concept of property under the Korean Constitution is narrowly construed. Second, this paper relies on the constitutional provision that recognizes "the right to a life worthy of human beings," which requires the State to guarantee minimum standard of living for all. As welfare recipients are deemed to receive benefits as a right under the Constitution, any deviation from the minimum requirement would constitute a violation of constitutional rights. In any case, termination or modification of welfare benefits that are concretized under the Act should be protected under the due process principle, because the principle would cover any government actions that restrict established legal rights. This paper argues that the procedural due process requires the recipients be guaranteed an opportunity to have a hearing before the termination or modification is enforced. An independent decision-maker should hear the proceedings, and the recipients should have an option to orally present their opinions in front of the decision-maker. The hearing process under the Administrative Procedures Act of Korea offers elements that would satisfy these procedural requirements. Thus, this paper concludes that the National Basic Living Security Act should be amended to adopt the hearing process under the Administrative Procedures Act in its termination and modification procedure.