선체용선계약에서 선박보험의 피보험자- 대법원 2019. 12. 27. 선고 2017다208232(본소), 2017다208249(반소) 판결을 중심으로 -

Abstract

In this paper, the following conclusions were drawn as a result of examining the insured profits and insured persons in this case in this paper. In other words, I think it would be okay to construct the following theory regarding the insured profit and the insured, which were problematic in this case. In other words, it would be good to organize the theory from the standpoint of the defeated hull charterer as follows. First, in the case of insured profits, The ship manager was entrusted with ship management from the hull charterer. After that, the ship manager signed an insurance contract for the hull charterer. After that, the ship manager's listing of the owner as the insured can be theoretically constructed to jointly protect the insured interests of the defendant, the owner, and the plaintiff, the hull charterer. Next is the question of whether or not the hull charterer is recognized as the insured by the undisclosed agent, and as discussed above, the hull charterer can be recognized as the insured by the undisclosed agent theory. Considering this, in order to reasonably solve the problem in this case, it should be theoretically constructed that the ship manager appointed by the hull charterer represents the hull charterer, and the ship manager appointed by the shipowner represents the shipowner. In other words, listing the ship manager as the insured must recognize the hull charterer as the insured as the ship manager himself/herself. Only by interpreting in this way, it is possible to protect both hull charterers and shipowners who have insured profits in the hull charter contract. This theoretical construction is a reasonable way to resolve disputes while considering the purpose of signing the contract. And as a principle of legal interpretation, it is considered to be consistent with the principle of rational interpretation.