• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.37
• /
• pp.89-118
• /
• 1999

The goal of this paper is to define the distinguishing characteristics of Korea's National Pension Scheme compared to the National Pension types of other countries and sees if those characteristics are significant enough in order to warrant calling these the "Korean Model". Also, another point to consider is, if this "Korean Model" does indeed exist, whether it is a 'sustainable' model or not. The National Pension Scheme, which was implemented in 1988, is similar to the public pension system formerly used in Japan. The National Pension Scheme broke away from this 'Japanese Model' in 1995 with implementation of the Farmers and Fishermen Pension, and the unique "Korean Model National Pension" was completed in 1998 with revision of the National Pension Law. The characteristics of the Korean National Pension can be defined as being balanced equally on ability and equality, possessing strong intergenerational income redistribution, having a nationally integrated structure, an incomplete funded method financial neutralism of the government and also as being a Monroe-oriented pension system. There are several limits to the sustainable development of this Korean Model National Pension, though. Even though the precondition of "the income determination problem of self-employed persons", which has strong intra-generational income redistribution. in actuality there are still many policy issues to be confronted such as the structure which 'transfers the burden to the future generation', the 'inter-generational inequity' of the incomplete funded system, persons excluded from coverage under the national integrated structure, 'compulsory loaning of the public sector by the National Pension Fund' under the government's principle of finance neutralism, the separate existence of the 'Monroe-oriented National Pension' from other pensions, etc.,. Therefore, it need to reform of NPS once again to sustainable development of KMNP.

• Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health
• /
• v.22 no.4 s.28
• /
• pp.578-590
• /
• 1989

This study was conducted to assess the equity in the regional insurance scheme through analysis of the computerized data from one regional insurance society and National Federation of Medical Insurance. We analysed the insurance contribution and benefit by the classes based on total and income-related contribution per household. The major findings of this study are as follows : 1. The average proportion of income-related contribution among the total was 39.2% and the upper classes show higher proportion of the income-related contribution. 2. The upper classes show higher health care utilization rate than the lower classes. It suggests that the lower classes have relatively large unmet medical needs. 3. The analysis through the Lorenz curve reveals that there exists transference of contributions from the upper to lower classes. But the cumulative percentage of insurance benefit is smaller than that of the number of the insured. It implies that regional medical insurance scheme in Korea has still some inequity in the context of social security principles.

• Journal of dental hygiene science
• /
• v.12 no.6
• /
• pp.675-681
• /
• 2012

Korean Ministry of Health and Welfare started to implement oral health hub center to provide oral health preventive program and dental treatment to public, especially dental vulnerable class in 2006. But, there is no applicant area to implement it regardless of national budget arrangement in 2012. This study is aimed to investigate the reason not to be implemented and requirements of implementation. 293 among 1,000 public dental hygienists in the area where have not implemented oral health hub center were surveyed in Korea from April to July in 2012 through convenience sampling. The questionnaire consisted of the reason why oral health hub center have not been implemented, the requirement of implementation, duty area and duty position et al. After removal of insufficient responses, 217 questionnaires were analyzed by t-test and ANOVA using SPSS 20.0. The reason why oral health hub center have not been implemented were deficiency of the priority list as compared with other health program (72.4%), space insufficiency (71.4%), regional budget insufficiency (70.5%), will insufficiency of oral health promotion (70.5%) and manpower insufficiency (62.7%). The first requirement of implementation were space expansion and regional budget expansion, followed by reduction of record-originated and administrative tasks, understanding on oral health program of higher ranking public officials in health center, manpower expansion, reduction of other tasks than oral health program and volunteer source expansion. Budget insufficiency and manpower insufficiency in Metropolis were ranked higher than other area (p<0.05). The group not to discuss oral health hub center graded each reason not to be implemented significantly higher than the other group (p<0.05). We suggested that to promote the importance of public oral health program be needed to public and higher ranking public officials to implement oral health hub center. In addition, we insisted that more dental manpower and budget be needed for reduction of oral health inequity in metropolis.