In a landmark decision, South Korea’s Supreme Court has ruled that same-sex couples are now eligible for spousal coverage under the national health insurance system, marking a significant step toward LGBTQIA+ rights in the country. The ruling, issued on Thursday, represents a historic moment in South Korea’s legal landscape regarding marriage equality.
The court’s decision grants same-sex couples the status of dependents for public health insurance, a breakthrough in a nation where such recognition has previously been elusive. However, it is important to note that this ruling is confined to health insurance benefits and does not extend to broader legal recognition of same-sex marriages.
The court articulated that the denial of spousal insurance coverage amounted to discrimination based on sexual orientation. This judgment was hailed as a significant victory for equality and human rights by Amnesty International’s East Asia researcher, Boram Jang.
Jang praised the ruling but also highlighted the lengthy and challenging legal battles that same-sex couples often face in securing basic rights. The case was initiated by plaintiffs Kim Yong-min and So Seong-wook, who challenged the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) after their spousal benefits were revoked in 2021 following media attention on their same-sex relationship. They argued that their exclusion from spousal benefits constituted unfair discrimination, particularly given that NHIS regulations allow for spousal status for common-law partners.
Despite the progress represented by this ruling, public support for same-sex marriage in South Korea remains relatively low compared to other Asian nations. A November survey by Pew Research found that 41% of South Koreans supported same-sex unions, positioning the country ninth out of twelve surveyed nations. In contrast, Japan recorded the highest support at 68%, while Indonesia showed the least support at 5%.
So Seong-wook expressed his elation at the court’s decision, declaring, “Love has won again,” during a news conference following the ruling.
