earticle

영어

The purpose of this study was to assess whether retirement households that have debts can completely repay their debts while living on their currently held assets during their overall period of retirement. To this end, a sample of retirement households was divided into those with debts and those without, and the assets usable to repay debts were evaluated for households having debts, excluding funds for retirement living. It was then determined whether those households could completely repay their existing debts by using their assets. The major results of the analysis were as follows. First of all, 24.3% of all retirement households had debts, and their mean debt balance was 48.05 million won. Of these debts, approximately 40%, or 20 million won, involved money received as a deposit for the lease of a house. However, the mean amount of financial assets held by these households was approximately 17.39 million won, indicating that on average, they had only part of the assets needed to repay the deposits. Retirement households that had deposit money to be repaid accounted for 41.1% of the households with debts and of these, only 24% had financial assets that were greater than the amount of deposit money to be repaid. Secondly, the mean debt-bearing indexes, assessed based on the assets and debts currently held, without considering money for old age living, were 1.9 times greater when financial assets were used, 6.4 times greater when financial assets and other assets were used, excluding houses in which the households were residing, and 17.3 times greater when all assets were used, which means that improvements involving doubling, at the least, occurred in each step. The percentage of households that could repay all debts with the assets addressed was only 13.6%when financial assets alone were used, but the percentage increased to 36.0% when real estate assets were used, excluding houses in which the households were residing, and to 78.7% when all assets, including houses in which the households were residing, were used. Thirdly, when money for retirement living was considered, negative values were found both for, and a ratio of 1.7:1 was obtained only when assets for debt repayment 3 were used for calculation. The percentages of retirement households that could repay all debts with assets for debt repayment 1, 2, and 3 were 7.8%, 16.3%, and 58.9%, in order of precedence, indicating differences from the results of evaluation that did not consider money needed for retirement living.

한국어

본 연구는 부채를 보유하고 있는 은퇴자가계가 현재 보유하고 있는 자산을 남은 은퇴기간동안 필요한 생활자금 으로 사용하면서 보유부채도 완전히 상환할 수 있는지를 평가하는 것을 목적으로 하였다. 이를 위해 국민노후보 장패널 3차년도(2009년) 자료를 바탕으로 은퇴자가계를 부채보유가계와 부채미보유가계로 구분하여, 부채보유 은퇴자가계의 남은 은퇴기간동안 필요한 노후생활자금을 제외한 자산(부채상환가능자산)을 평가하였다. 최종적으 로는 부채상환가능자산을 이용할 경우 보유부채의 완전상환이 가능한지를 파악하였다. 주요 분석결과로는 첫째, 은퇴자가계 중 부채를 보유한 가계는 은퇴자가계의 24.3%였고 이들의 평균 부채잔 액은 4,805만원이었다. 이들이 보유한 부채 중 약 40%는 전월세 보증금으로 받은 돈이고 약 2,000만원이었다. 그러나 이들이 보유하고 있는 평균금융자산은 약 1,739만원으로 반환보증금의 일부만을 금융자산으로 보유하고 있었다. 실제 반환해야할 보증금이 있는 은퇴자가계는 부채보유 은퇴자가계의 41.1%이고, 이들 중 반환보증금보 다 많은 금액의 금융자산을 보유하고 있는 가계는 24가계에 불과하였다. 둘째, 은퇴자가계의 노후생활자금을 고 려하지 않고 현재 보유하고 있는 자산과 부채를 기준으로 평가한 부채부담지표의 평균은 금융자산을 이용할 경우 1.9배, 금융자산과 거주주택이외의 자산을 이용할 경우는 6.4배, 총자산을 이용할 경우는 17.3배로 각 단계에서 2배 이상의 향상을 보였다. 또한 각각 적용된 자산으로 총부채를 상환할 수 있는 가계는 금융자산만 이용할 경우 에는 13.6%에 불과하였으나 거주주택이외의 부동산자산까지를 이용할 경우에는 36.0%로 증가하였고, 거주주택 을 포함한 모든 자산을 사용할 경우에는 78.7%까지 증가하였다. 셋째, 노후생활자금을 고려하여 평가한 경우에 는 부채상환가능자산1과 부채상환가능자산2에 대해서는 모두 (-)의 값을 나타내어 부채의 완전상환 불가능하였 고, 부채상환가능자산3을 이용할 경우에 비로소 1.7배의 비율이 계산되었다. 또한 금융자산이나 금융자산과 거주 주택이외의 자산, 또는 총자산을 이용하여 총부채를 상환할 수 있는 은퇴자가계는 7.8%, 16.3%, 58.9% 순으 로 나타나 노후생활자금을 고려하지 않은 평가결과와 차이를 보였다.