보험약관의 교부·설명의무위반과 그 효과의 문제
A Study of Duty to Deliver and Explain Policy Conditions
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The Insurance Contract Law of korean Commercial Code has been revised in 1991. Commercial Code §638 is the article of insurance contract between the insurer and the insurant, there are several problems about §638-3(the policy delivery and explain) in case and practical system. The korean Commercial Law which is a general law on insurance contract is different one from the Regulation Law §3 on exceptional provisions and effective ones. The contract has been applied with the case in the practical business, The effect of the Regulation Law and Insurance Law Infringement is different by the case in the court. The Commercial Law codified that insurer should deliver the insurance policy and explain the important fact of the provisions to the insurant in korean Commercial Code §638-3 ①·②. The insurant could cancel the insurance contract within a month to infringement. However, the Regulation Law §3④ stipulates that couldn't insist on the contract in this case in Korea. The questions are followings. ① the insurance policy delivery and explain, ② the term of the insurant's(insured) canceling the contract within a month, ③ the legal questions unless the insurant cancels the contract and ④ basic regulations of exemption by the case. The title of korean Commercial Law §638 clears on proper regulations in 'deliver and explain' and the initial date in reckoning of canceling the contract must be revised ‘the date of receipt of insurance policy' and further the contract followed the policy unless the insurant cancel the contract. Moreover, the basis of exemption requires to codify on Commercial Law in conformed with the case and the practical business in advance. In relation to this, the Revised Draft in Commercial Law has been arranged in 2008, but 'explain important fact' and 'expansion of cancel term' §638-3①② have been amended only. I think that the contract law of Commercial Code requires to be revised on taking the insurer's and insurant's interest into account, and in conformed with the cases and practical business of insurance in the future.
Abstract
The Insurance Contract Law of korean Commercial Code has been revised in 1991. Commercial Code §638 is the article of insurance contract between the insurer and the insurant, there are several problems about §638-3(the policy delivery and explain) in case and practical system. The korean Commercial Law which is a general law on insurance contract is different one from the Regulation Law §3 on exceptional provisions and effective ones. The contract has been applied with the case in the practical business, The effect of the Regulation Law and Insurance Law Infringement is different by the case in the court. The Commercial Law codified that insurer should deliver the insurance policy and explain the important fact of the provisions to the insurant in korean Commercial Code §638-3 ①·②. The insurant could cancel the insurance contract within a month to infringement. However, the Regulation Law §3④ stipulates that couldn't insist on the contract in this case in Korea. The questions are followings. ① the insurance policy delivery and explain, ② the term of the insurant's(insured) canceling the contract within a month, ③ the legal questions unless the insurant cancels the contract and ④ basic regulations of exemption by the case. The title of korean Commercial Law §638 clears on proper regulations in 'deliver and explain' and the initial date in reckoning of canceling the contract must be revised ‘the date of receipt of insurance policy' and further the contract followed the policy unless the insurant cancel the contract. Moreover, the basis of exemption requires to codify on Commercial Law in conformed with the case and the practical business in advance. In relation to this, the Revised Draft in Commercial Law has been arranged in 2008, but 'explain important fact' and 'expansion of cancel term' §638-3①② have been amended only. I think that the contract law of Commercial Code requires to be revised on taking the insurer's and insurant's interest into account, and in conformed with the cases and practical business of insurance in the future.
참고문헌 (38)
- 권오승, "(제2판)"經濟法"" (1999), 법문사
- 김성태, "保險法講義" (2001), 법문사
- 김정호, "商法講義(下)" (2000), 법문사
- 신창선, "經濟法講義" (2000), 성민사
- 양승규, "保險法의 法理" (2000), 삼지원
- 양승규, "(제3판)"保險法"" (1998), 삼영사
- 양승규, "保險法의 爭點" (2000), 법문사
- 이기수, "(제3판)"經濟法"" (2000), 세창출판사
- 이기수, "(제4판)"保險法?海商法"" (2002), 박영사
- 이남기, "(제2개정판)"經濟法"" (2000), 박영사
- 이범찬, "(제2판)"商法(上)"" (2001), 삼영사
- 이은영, "約款規制法" (1994), 박영사
- 정동윤, "商法(下)" (2000), 법문사
- 정찬형, "(제2판)"商法講義(下)"" (2000), 박영사
- 최기원, "(신정판)"保險法"" (1998), 박영사
- 최기원, "(제11판)"商法學新論(下)"" (2001), 박영사
- Karl Hax, "Grundlagen des Versicherungswesens" (1964)
- R. C. Henderson, "Insurance Law" (2000), Lexis Publishing
- 김선정, "保險契約上 告知義務에 관한 최근판례와 연구동향", 상사법연구, 14(2) (1995), 한국상사법학회
- 김성태, "保險法의 本質", 상사판례연구 (1996), 박영사
- 김영태, "告知義務違反으로 인한 保險契約의 解止", 대법원판례해설, (27) (1997)
- 김택주, "保險募集人의 說明과 個別約定의 成立", 상사판례연구, 5 (1992), 한국상사판례학회
- 박수영, "商法 제638조의3과 約款規制法 제3조와의 關係", 보험학회지, 59 (2001), 한국보험학회
- 손주찬, "保險約款明示義務違反과 告知義務違反을 이유로 하는 契約解止", 판례월보, (313) (1996), 판례월보사
- 손주찬, "保險約款의 明示義務:개정상법과 약관규제법과의 관계", 보험조사월보, 16(6) (1993), 보험감독원
- 손지열, "約款의 契約編入과 明示, 說明義務, in 민사법논총(제2), 후암 곽윤직선생 고희기념" (2000), 박영사
- 양승규, "保險者의 約款說明義務違反과 保險契約者의 告知義務違反의 效果", 저스티스, 29(2) (1996), 한국법학원
- 양승규, "보험계약의 성립과 約款의 交付?明示義務", 사법행정, 통권 : 377 (1992), 한국사법행정학회
- 양승규, "商法改正의 着眼事項(1) in 상법개정의 착안점" (2000), 법무부
- 장경환, "保險約款의 交付??說明義務", 보험학회지, 46 (1995), 한국보험학회
- 장경환, "保險約款과 約款規制法", 보험법연구, (2) (1998)
- 장경환, "商法 제4편(보험법)改正意見", 상사법연구, 24(2) (2005), 한국상사법학회
- 장경환, "保險約款과 約款規制法 in 기업과 법" (1997), 한국사법행정학회
- 정부제출안, "商法一部改正法律案" (2008)
- 정진옥, "告知義務와 約款說明義務의 衝突", 법학연구, 38(1) (1997), 부산대학교 법학연구소
- 주기동, "約款說明義務와 危險維持義務와의 關係", 법조, 49(5) (2000), 법조협회
- 최완진, "約款說明義務違反과 告知義務違反과의 關係", 고시연구, 통권 : 326 (2001), 고시연구사
- 현종찬, "保險約款의 交付明示義務와 그 이행입증", 손해보험, 통권 : 356 (1993), 대한손해보험협회
