자동차보험 대인배상Ⅱ에서 승낙피보험자의 사상(死傷)에 대한 면책약관의 타당성에 관한 판례연구-대법원 2011. 3. 24. 선고 2010다94021 판결-

Abstract

Voluntary automobile insurance standard policy conditions are composed of five types of coverage, namely, third party liability(to property damage and of bodily injury), self-incurred personal accident, protection against uninsured automobiles, and damage to own vehicle. In the third party liability of bodily injury terms, the insured has been divided into five kinds, because there is an endorsement that extends third party liability to cover an accident occurring while another person in addition to the named insured is driving automobile. So extension of coverage for the insured while driving another person's automobile is necessary. Under voluntary automobile insurance, in addition to the ‘the named insured’ indicated in the policy, the following persons are insured: ‘the spouse (including unregistered spouse) and relatives of the named insured’, ‘the permitting insured’(namely, any person who drives or uses the automobile with the permission of the named insured) and ‘the employer of the named insured’, and ‘the driving insured’(namely, any person who drives above insureds)Coverage is also excluded for any loss to the insured persons caused by being held liable for bodily injury to death and injury of any person who drives or uses the automobile with the permission of the named insured in voluntary automobile insurance standard policy conditions. According to this Supreme Court case, the exclusion to death and injury of ‘the permitting insured’ in third party liability of bodily injury is a right decision. But I strongly oppose this Supreme Court case, because the judgement made it incorrect about interpretation of exclusion and extent of ‘the permitting insured’ under voluntary automobile insurance. Also violate legislative purpose of ‘Act on the regulation of terms and condition’ and article 6(General principle), Article 7(Prohibition of exemption clause).