서민취약계층복지 관련 법제의 발전방향

(1)

. 1.

2.

3.

. 1.

2.

3.

.

* ,

: 2011. 12. 10 / : 2011. 12. 19 / : 2011. 12. 19

(2)

I.

, .

.

, , .

, ,

.

( ,

, )

3 .¹⁾

.

. , ,

2)

.

. ,

1) , “ ”, , , 1992, 156 .

2) 1998

,

. , “

”, 7 4 , ,

2007, 13 ; , , ,

, 2010, 108~109 .

(3)

. .

. 1

.

“ ” “ ” “ ”

. “ ”

“ ” ,

. “ ”

, “ ”

. ,

.

. .

“

(4)

” “ ” .

.

. ,

,

‘ ’

.³⁾

. , 1

. .

OECD

. OECD 50~150%

.

2007 4 , 290

, 145~435 .

145 .⁴⁾

. 2010 302

2,000 , 4

3) , “ ‘ ’ ”, Issue & Focus

52 , , 2010, 1 .

4) http://cfe.org/mboard/print_page.asp?cin=mn1242381947&idx=17772; , “

”, KDI 2008 , , 2008,

84~96 ; , “ ”, 10

, , 2009, 419-445 ; 6 ,

, Issue Paper, , 2010, 27 ; , “

”, , ,

, 2011, 6

(5)

150~155

.⁵⁾ OECD

, 145 ~155

. .

. ,

.

. .

2011 1

532,583 , 4 1,439,413 .⁶⁾ OECD

,

. ,

.

5) http://www.wikipress.co.kr/privat_paper.php?number=1017&news_article=news_article

6) 2010-65

(6)

.

. 2007 7

2 2 “

” .

‘ ’

. ,

.

,

. , ‘ ’

, , ,

.

, , .

.

OECD

‘ ’ ‘ ’

(7)

, ( ) .

,

‘ ’ .

. .

.

, .

.

, . ,

,

. .

. ,

.

. , “

100 120 ” ( 3 2).

(8)

, .

‘ ’

. , ,

.⁷⁾

, ,

, .

.

,

.

. ,

, 100 120

. ,

.

7) .

1990 , , ,

( , “ ”, , ,

2000, 26~38 ).

(9)

, .

.

,

.

,

. ‘ ’, ‘

’ .

.

, , .

.

,

. ,

.

. 1

(10)

.

,

8),

9),

10) .

.¹¹⁾

, .

8) , , ,

.

( , 2011

, , 2011, 231 ).

9) ,

, ,

( , , 239 )

10) , , ,

. ,

( , , 247 ). 2011 5 -6

23,669 (12,135 ) , 12,135

4,005 (33%) , , , 5,088 (42%)

(2011 6 14 ).

11) ,

(E. Eichenhofer, Sozialrecht, Auflag. 5, Moher Siebeck, 2004, f. 90; Clemens, in: Wissing-Umbach (Hrsg.), 40 Jahre Landessozialgerichtsbarkeit, 1994, f. 239).

(11)

( 49 ),

( 50 ), .

12) .

.

. ,

.¹³⁾

.

, .

12) , ,

, , ( 31 )

13)

( 49 1 ).

18

( 30 1 ).

18 18

( )

( 30 2 ).

2 ( " " )

65 , 65

( 14 1 1 ).

(12)

. ,

14)

.

15)

. ,

,

16) , .

, ,

.

14)

, , ,

, ,

( , , ),

. “

” , ,

.

15) , , , ,

, , , ,

, ,

.

16) . ,

.

, 1 .

1 ,

1

( 10 1 ) ,

.

(13)

.¹⁷⁾

,

.

,

.

.¹⁸⁾

.

. .

19)

.

17) , , , 2010, 509 .

18) ,

, , 2010, 76 .

19) , ,

.

,

( , , , 2009, 100 ;

, , 105 ).

(14)

. ,

,

.

. .

. ,

.

.²⁰⁾

.

, .²¹⁾

. ,

, .

20) , , 509 .

21)

% .

, , ,

.( , ,

171 )

(15)

. ,

.

, . ,

.

23)

.²⁴⁾

.

.²⁵⁾

22)

, “ ”, 108 ,

, 2005, 22 ; , “ ”,

, 2006, 60

; , “ ”, 34 ,

, 2008, 44

23) , , , ,

, , ,

( 7 ).

, ( 5 3).

, ,

,

( 15 ). 100 120

.

24) , ,

, 2009, 84~86 ; , , 171 .

(16)

,

( 6 1 ).

( 6 2 ).

3 ( 6 3 ).

3 .

.²⁶⁾

. ,

. 3

. ,

. 3

. , 3

.

.²⁷⁾

25) , ,

, 2007, 65 ;

, “ ”, 36 2 ,

, 2004, 88 ; , “ ”,

108 , , 2005, 35 ; ,

, 18 , , 2008, 13

26) Casas, Ramón Peña, Minimum Income Standard in Enlarged EU : Guarantee Minimum Income Schemes, Transnational Exchange Project, Setting Minimum Social Standards across Europe, Working Paper , 2005, pp.7

27) .

.

(17)

.

.²⁹⁾

.

,

.

(Lebensrisiken)

(Tzong-li Hsu, “Verfassungsrechtliche Schranken der Leistungsgesetzgebung im Sozialstaat”, Studien und Materialien zur Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit Band 34 Herausgegeben von Christian Starck, Nomos Verlag, 1986, ff.104)

28) , “ ”, 15 2 ,

, 2008, 329 ;

. , ,

,

.

. J. Hoffmann,

“Sicherung eines Existenzminimums im Sozialstaat - Zur aktuellen Diskussion um die Reform des Sozialhilferechts”:, Vierteljahresschrift für Sozialrecht, 2002, ff.107 .

29) 1952 ILO 102 , “

(Social Security Minimum Standard Convention)"

50% , 20% ,

50% ,

. OECD 50%, EUROSTAT

60%, World Bank 1/3

1/2 .

, ,

, , 1989, 229 ; ,

, , 1998, 37 ; 7 ,

, / , 2006, 140 ;

, “ ”, 34 ,

, 2008, 400

(18)

.

, ,

, , ,

, ,

.

, , ,

(19)

. . ,

.³⁰⁾ .³¹⁾ 130%

.

. ,

.³²⁾

30) 74.2%

.

( , ,

, 2009, 81 ).

31) .

,

( , , 81 ). 2010

,

(2010.9.17), (2010.9.7), (2010.6.10)

.

32) “2011 ”

150%

60,278 (35,458 )

340 1.8% .

, “

”, 24 1 , , 2005,

15 .

(20)

. 2011 4 29

.³³⁾ “

5 ( ) ,

,

( 1 ),

( 3 ), 5 , ‘

’ ‘

’( 4 ) 5

.

46 ( ) ,

·

( 1 ), 1 2

,

( 3 ). , ,

,

‘

’ ”

.

33) 2011.4.29. 2010 2549 :

2011 10 30

( 2011 969 ).

(21)

. , ,

.

7 2

, , , , ,

.³⁵⁾ , 5 2

, .

. ,

.

. ,

34) , “

’

” .

35) , , , ,

( 7 2 ).

(22)

.

. ,

.

.³⁶⁾

, .

,

.

. .

.

‘ ’ .

.³⁷⁾

.

, .

36)

.

37) , , 79 .

(23)

.³⁸⁾

.

. ,

.

, ,

.³⁹⁾

.

, .⁴⁰⁾

.

, .

, ,

.

. ,

38) , , 513 ; Fouarge, D. and R. Layte, “Welfare Regime and Poverty Dynamics: The Duration and Recurrence of Poverty Spells in Europe“, Journal of Social Policy, Vol.34, No.3, 2005, pp.407 426.

39) , , , 2004, 353

. 40)

.

(24)

,

, .⁴¹⁾

, .

Ⳕ đ ು

.

. .

, ,

.

,

.

,

. ,

41) , , 15

; , “ ”, ,

, 2005 20 ; , “ ”,

13 2 , , 2002, 119 ; , “

”, 57 1 , , 2005, 264 ;

, , 65~67 ; 7 , , 177 ; ,

“ ”, 24 1 , , 2008, 200

; , ,

, 2008, 141~146 .

(25)

.

( )

( ).

. ,

,

.

, ,

. ,

.

(26)

ₙ Ł ྙ ⨭

, , , ,

2010

, ,

, 2008

, ,

, 2007

6 , , Issue Paper,

, 2010

, , , 2004

7 , ,

/ , 2006

, , , 1998

, 2011 , , 2011

, ,

, 2009

, , 18 , ,

2008

,

, , 2010

, , , 1989

, , , 2009

, , , 2010

, ,

, 2009

, “ ”, 24 1 ,

, 2008

, “ ”, ,

, 2005

(27)

7 4 , , 2007

, “ ”, 108

, , 2005

, “ ”, 57 1 ,

, 2005

, “ ”,

, 2006

, “ ”,

13 2 , , 2002

, “ ”,

34 , , 2008

, “ ”,

24 1 , , 2005

, “ ”, 108

, , 2005

, “ ”, KDI

2008 , , 2008

, “ ”, 36

2 , , 2004

, “ ”, 34

, , 2008

, “ ”, , , 2000

, “ ”, , , 1992

, “ ”, 10

, , 2009

, “ ‘ ’ ”, Issue

& Focus 52 , , 2010

, “ ”,

, , ,

(28)

2011

Clemens, in: Wissing-Umbach (Hrsg.), 40 Jahre Landessozialgerichtsbarkeit, 1994 Casas, Ramón Peña, Minimum Income Standard in Enlarged EU : Guarantee

Minimum Income Schemes, Transnational Exchange Project, Setting Minimum Social Standards across Europe, Working Paper , 2005 E. Eichenhofer, Sozialrecht, Auflag. 5, Moher Siebeck, 2004

Fouarge, D. and R. Layte, “Welfare Regime and Poverty Dynamics: The Duration and Recurrence of Poverty Spells in Europe”, Journal of Social Policy, Vol.34, No.3, 2005

J. Hoffmann, “Sicherung eines Existenzminimums im Sozialstaat - Zur aktuellen Diskussion um die Reform des Sozialhilferechts”: Vierteljahresschrift für Sozialrecht, 2002

Tzong-li Hsu, “Verfassungsrechtliche Schranken der Leistungsgesetzgebung im Sozialstaat”, Studien und Materialien zur Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit Band 34 Herausgegeben von Christian Starck, Nomos Verlag, 1986

(29)

< >

. ,

.

. ,

. , ,

. ,

.

(30)

Journal of Legislation Research / 41th Issue

:

The Development Direction of Vulnerable People’s Welfare-related Legislation

Yoon, Seok-Jin^*⁴²⁾

Protection of vulnerable people in our country today, “the National Basic Livelihood Security Act,” is primarily responsible. But current law income and wealth, and by a person responsible for supporting consider only the absolute protection of the poor, and because it is insufficient for the protection of vulnerable people. Specifically, current law does not mean the relative poverty of vulnerable people is limited to the protection of economic demand. It also incorporates the payment of salaries paid individual because the people most vulnerable to social protection is insufficient demand. Dependent regulation is too strict and a person responsible for supporting do not receive legal protection by forming a dead zone is a major cause. In this study, the development direction for the protection of vulnerable people suggests. The first, “National Basic Livelihood Security Act” award in determining the minimum cost of living is relatively proposed to introduce the concept of poverty. Second, payment of the consolidation benefit and the individual benefit to adopt a intermix approach, the social needs of vulnerable people to adapt to that proposed. Third, a person responsible for supporting dependent criteria and whether according to the actual supporting to be judged.

* Associate Research Fellow, Korea Legislation Research Institute, Ph.D. in Law