인슈어테크와 보험법적 쟁점

Abstract

FinTech, which integrates innovative IT technologies and finances have been receiving attention lately, and in the insurance service sector, utilization of InsurTech has also increased rapidly. With the advancement of InsurTech, reviews on insurance law issues resulting from the concentration of disease and health information on the insurer have been lacking. For example, when entering a personal insurance contract, not only the conditions and insurance rates, etc. of insurance contractors. but also decisions for acquiring risks are made based on health examination results or announcements in the subscription form drafted by the insurance contractor or insurant. Therefore, insurance contractors, etc. have the duty to provide accurate information related to the health status of the insurant to the insurer. This duty of notification in the past concentrated risk information on the insurance contractor, and therefore, it is a duty recognized based on the characteristics of information asymmetry unless insurance contractors, etc. provide the information to the insurer, as well as utmost good faith of insurance contracts. The problem is that whether the insurance contractor, etc. maintains the same duty of notification in a situation where a lot of information is amassed by the insurer with the development of InsurTech. This problem is the same in the case of duty of announcement for risk change increase aside from the duty of notification. If the insurer possesses important information about the insurant through InsurTech and used it to measure ‘risk’ at the time of acquiring insurance such as computing insurance premiums, etc., it cannot be seen as a violation of the duty of notification even if the insurance contractor did not provide information related to the insurer at the time of entering the insurance contract. Furthermore, even if information on importer matters are possessed by the insurer when entering the insurance contract and this is not notified to the insurance contractor, it corresponds to “when the insurer knows such fact at the time of the contract or is unknown due to gross negligence,” and therefore, it cannot be viewed as termination of contract due to violation of duty of notification. However, by allowing real-time collection of relevant information through InsurTech and if the insurance contractor receives an insurance premium discount but the provided data are intentionally altered to distort the corresponding information or provision of data is stopped/suspended by the insurance contractor, etc., the intention of the insurance contractor, etc. can be recognized, and it can be viewed that there was a violation of the duty of notification. And for execution of the duty of explanation when inviting insurance subscription using AI, it is not currently a stage where a separate legal personality for AI insurance planners can be recognized. Therefore, if the AI insurance planner violates the duty of explanation, the insurer bears responsibility for compensation for damages according to insurance laws and legal principles of the insurance industry act.