發文單位：司法院
解釋字號：釋字第683號
解釋日期：民國99年12月24日
解釋爭點：勞保現金給付未於收到申請之十日內發給不加計遲延給付利息，違憲？
資料來源：
司法周刊 第 1523 期 1 版
司法院公報 第 53 卷 3 期 1-35 頁
司法院大法官解釋（二十五）（100年5月版）第 471-521 頁
法令月刊 第 62 卷 2 期 144 頁
總統府公報 第 6962 號 23 頁

相關法條：
中華民國憲法 第 15、153、155 條 ( 36.01.01 )
中華民國憲法增修條文 第 10 條 ( 94.06.10 )
行政執行法 第 30 條 ( 98.12.30 )
行政程序法 第 139、149、51 條 ( 94.12.28 )
民法 第 199、213、229、233、98 條 ( 84.01.16 )
民法 第 247-1 條 ( 88.04.21 )
稅捐稽徵法 第 28、38 條 ( 99.01.06 )
所得稅法 第 125-1 條 ( 99.06.15 )
證券交易稅條例 第 13 條 ( 98.12.30 )
規費法 第 18、19 條 ( 91.12.11 )
關稅法 第 47、65 條 ( 99.05.12 )
保險法 第 34 條 ( 96.07.18 )
強制汽車責任保險法 第 25、35 條 ( 94.02.05 )
國家賠償法 第 2 條 ( 69.07.02 )
勞工保險條例 第 1、11、17、2、28、30、56、64、72、77 條 ( 84.02.28 )
勞工保險條例施行細則 第 18、57、76 條 ( 85.09.13 )
公教人員保險法 第 22 條 ( 98.07.08 )

解釋文：
中華民國八十五年九月十三日修正發布之勞工保險條例施行細則第五十七條規定：「被保險人或其受益人申請現金給付手續完備經審查應予發給者，保險人應於收到申請書之日起十日內發給之。」旨在促使勞工保險之保險人儘速完成勞工保險之現金給付，以保障被保險勞工或其受益人於保險事故發生後之生活，符合憲法保護勞工基本國策之本旨。

理由書：
憲法第一百五十三條第一項規定：「國家為改良勞工及農民之生活，增進其生產技能，應制定保護勞工及農民之法律，實施保護勞工及農民之政策。」第一百五十五條 前段規定：「國家為謀社會福利，應實施社會保險制度。」而憲法增修條文第十條第八項亦要求國家應重視社會保險之社會福利工作。故國家就勞工因其生活及職業 可能遭受之損害，應建立共同分擔風險之社會保險制度。為落實上開憲法委託，立法機關乃制定勞工保險條例，使勞工於保險事故發生時，能儘速獲得各項保險給付，以保障勞工生活，促進社會安全。
        八十五年九月十三日修正發布之勞工保險條例施行細則第五十七條規定：「被保險人或其受益人申請現金給付手續完備經審查應予發給者，保險人應於收到申請書之日起十日內發給之。」旨在促使勞工保險之保險人儘速完成勞工保險之現金給付，以保障被保險勞工或其受益人於保險事故發生後之生活，符合勞工保險條例保障勞工生活之意旨，與憲法保護勞工基本國策之本旨無違。至於被保險勞工或其受益人，因可歸責於保險人之遲延給付而受有損害時，如何獲得救濟，立法者固有自由形成 之權限，惟基於上開憲法保護勞工之本旨，立法者自應衡酌社會安全機制之演進，配合其他社會保險制度之發展，並參酌勞工保險條例第十七條已有滯納金及暫行拒絕保險給付之規定，就勞工在保險關係地位之改善，隨時檢討之，併此指明。


J. Y. Interpretation No.   683
Date：2010.12.24
Issue：Is it unconstitutional for labor insurance cash payment not being made within ten days since the receipt of application and without the addition of delayed interests?

Holding：
Article 57 of the Enforcement Rules of the Labor Insurance Act, amended and promulgated on September 13, 1996, stipulates: “Once the application for cash payment by the insured or his/her beneficiaries is completed and approved for disbursement, the insurer shall disburse the payment within ten days since the date the application is received.” The purpose is to prompt the labor insurer complete the cash payment of labor insurance as soon as possible, and to protect the livelihood of the insured laborers or their beneficiaries in the aftermath of the insured incidents, and is in compliance with the fundamental national policies of labor protection under the Constitution.

Reasoning：
Paragraph 1 of Article 153 of the Constitution stipulates: “The State, in order to improve the livelihood of laborers and farmers and to improve their productive skills, shall enact laws and carry out policies for their protection.” The front paragraph of Article 155 stipulates: “The State, in order to promote social welfare, shall establish a social insurance system.” Article 10, Paragraph 8 of the Amendments to the Constitution also mandates the State to put emphasis on social welfare services from social insurance. Therefore, the State shall establish a social insurance system to jointly undertake the risk of possible losses resulting from their lives or occupations. To realize this constitutional mandate, the legislative body enacts the Labor Insurance Act to ensure that laborers can promptly get various insurance payments in light of the occurrence of insurance incidents, so as to protect the livelihood of the laborers and to promote social security.

Article 57 of the Enforcement Rules of the Labor Insurance Act, amended and promulgated on September 13, 1996, stipulates: “Once the application for cash payment by the insured or his/her beneficiaries is completed and approved for disbursement, the insurer shall disburse the payment within ten days since the date the application is received.” The purpose is to prompt the labor insurer complete the cash payment of labor insurance as soon as possible, and to protect the livelihood of the insured laborers or their beneficiaries in the aftermath of the insured incidents, and does not contravene the fundamental national policies of labor protection under the Constitution. With regard to how the insured laborers or their beneficiaries may seek remedy for damages resulting from the culpable delayed payment by the insurers, it should be pointed out that while the legislators have the naturally evolved authority, yet based on the above-indicated fundamental purpose under the Constitution for labor protection, they should certainly weigh in the progresses of social security mechanism, coordinate with the development of other social insurance systems, and make reference to the provisions on late fees and provisional suspension of insurance payment under Article 17 of the Labor Insurance Act so as to review constantly how the status of laborers can be improved in the labor insurance relations.

Translated by Prof. Dr. Ming-woei Chang .