JIPYONG LLC

Jipyong News|Column

Success in a Lawsuit for Revocation of Rejection of Application for Change of Social Welfare Service

2011.01.30

On January 30, Jipyong & Jisung represented A, who has a physical disability in a lawsuit against the head of Yangcheon-Gu Office in Seoul for the revocation of rejection of application for change of social welfare services and achieved a verdict in favor of the plaintiff from the Seoul Administrative Court. 
 
This case was filed by the plaintiff who wishes to leave the social welfare facility and be self-sufficient in the local community after living isolated from society for the past twenty years because his family was unable to look after him. The administrative lawsuit was launched after A requested a change of his social welfare service to the Yangcheon-Gu Office according to the Social Welfare Services Act and his application was rejected. 
 
The 1st Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court issued a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, stating that "it is illegal to reject an application for home-support outside of welfare facilities from people with disabilities for the reason that they are not in receipt of basic living security." 
 
In order to provide an opportunity for promoting the provision of social welfare services in a community-based setting rather than an institution-based setting, similar to the case of Olmstead v. L.C., 1999 WL 407380 (1999) in the U.S.A., Jipyong & Jisung has filed two lawsuits. Although it was unsuccessful in the administrative lawsuit filed by two people with serious disabilities living in Kkottongnae in Eumseong-Gun at the Cheongju District Court, it was successful in this lawsuit against Yangcheon-Gu Office at the Seoul Administrative Court. 
 
We hope that this case will pave the way for an improvement in the rights of people living with disabilities to obtain community-based welfare services and receive care which is most appropriate to their needs. 
 
[Korean Article Reference]

<ul>
	<li><a href="http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/opinion/column/394262.html" target="_blank">The Hankyoreh - [Contribution] Declaration of Independence from Institution-based Welfare Services by People with Disabilities / Attorney Sung-Taek LIM (December 18, 2009)</a></li>
	<li>Newsis - Welfare Services only available for people in receipt of Basic Living Security even if they have a disability? The Court rules that this is 'unjustified' (January 30, 2011)</li>
	<li>Able News - Request for Change of Social Welfare Services in favor of community-based programs by people with disabilities is 'justified' (February 1, 2011)</li>
	<li>Welfare News - 'Application for Social Welfare Services' which is a dormant legislation, Will it Wake Up?... (February 7, 2011)</li>
</ul>

<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%" />
Note 1: Olmstead v. L.C., 1999 WL 407380 (1999): In 1999, in a lawsuit filed by two women suffering from mental disabilities who claimed that although the treatment team had concluded that treatment in a community setting would be the most appropriate, Ohio State confined them in an institution rather than offering them care through a community-based program. The United States Supreme Court ruled that under the public services portion of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 'states are required to provide community-based treatment for persons with mental disabilities when state's treatment professionals determine that such placement is appropriate, affected persons do not oppose such treatment, and placement can be reasonably accommodated, taking into account the resources available to state and the needs of others with mental disabilities (Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, § 202, <a href="http://web2.westlaw.com/find/default.wl?tf=-1&rs=WLW11.01&fn=_top&sv=Split&docname=42USCAS12132&tc=-1&pbc=30E3910F&ordoc=1999146002&findtype=L&db=1000546&utid=2&vr=2.0&rp=%2ffind%2fdefault.wl&mt=LawSchoolPractitioner" target="_blank">42 U.S.C.A. § 12132</a>)'.

As a result, Ohio State began to devise plans for ensuring that people living with disabilities can receive services in an integrated environment as much as possible, and it also changed the direction of its policies such that it offers community-based welfare services rather than institution-based welfare services. The Olmstead case is deemed to be a landmark case which offers a new turning point for the movement of independence from institution-based welfare services.

News [Lawyer of the Moment] Partner Yully KANG of Jipyong & Jisung Attorneys at Law 2011.01.31

News Jipyong & Jisung Represented Hong Kong Superfund Group in its Registration Process with the Korean Financial Supervisory Service for Sales in the Korean Market 2011.01.18

Back to List

Professionals

Partner
Sung Taek LIM
+82-2-6200-1746 stlim@jipyong.com