금융소비자보호법상 보험상품의 설명의무와 그 위반의 효과- 청약철회권 및 위법계약해지권을 중심으로 -

Abstract

In general, sales of insurance products are not only made in the form of conforming contracts that depend on terms and conditions, but also there is a risk of damage to the policy holder due to information asymmetry and incompatibility of status between the parties to the contract, and thus in order to improve the fairness and equity of contracts, various safeguards are being prepared for them. Among these, the most important protection device is the insurer's duty of explanation. Therefore, the Commercial Act and other special laws stipulate various obligations of explanation in order to protect policy holders when signing and transferring insurance contracts, and in particular, the obligation to explain terms and conditions and the obligation to explain insurance products are separately regulated. In other words, Article 638-3 of the Commercial Act and Article 3 of the Terms and Conditions Regulation Act give the insurer the duty to deliver and explain the terms and conditions, and the recently enacted Article 19 of the Financial Consumer Protection Act separately and specially imposes the duty to explain important details of insurance products. In this paper, while comparing and analyzing the relationship between these regulations, the obligation to explain insurance products under the Financial Consumer Protection Act was reviewed and the effect of the violation was considered. In particular, regarding the problem of the right to withdraw subscription and the right to terminate an illegal contract as an effect of violation of duty of explanation, legislative alternatives were sought, focusing on the following issues. First, after the duty of explanation under the Insurance Business Act was transferred to the Financial Consumer Protection Act, what characteristics the “duty to explain” of insurance products under the Financial Consumer Protection Act compared to the duty of explanation under the Commercial Act and the Contract Regulations Act were analyzed. And among the effects of violation of duty of explanation, the problem of the right to withdraw subscription and the right to terminate illegal contract was identified and a solution was derived. Second, it was examined what is the characteristics and differences in the exercise requirements and effects of “the right to withdraw subscription” and “the right to terminate illegal contracts” due to violation of the duty to explain insurance products under the Financial Consumer Protection Act compared to the legal effects of the general legal principles of the Civil Act, such as the right to withdraw, the right to cancel, and the right to terminate. In addition, in the application to insurance practice, what kind of collision problems occur between these regulations was examined, the root cause was identified, and improvement measures were prepared.