2007년 確定한 政府의 商法(保險編) 改正案에 대한 意見 (A Study on 2007 Government Amendment Draft of Korean Commercial Code (Insurance Law))

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국금융법학회
· 수록지 정보 : 금융법연구 / 4권 / 2호 / 119 ~ 163페이지
· 저자명 : 정찬형

초록

1. That the Draft stipulates newly the principle of the utmost good faith in all insurance contracts (Art. 638 Para. 2), is very reasonable.
2. The newly regulated (by the Draft) powers of insurance agent, insurance broker or insurance salesman (Art. 646-2) are required to be stipulated in more detail and correctly.
3. The newly regulated Articles saying that the insurance contract by fraud is invalid (Art. 655-2) and the insurer does not have any obligation against the claim of the amount insured by fraud or forged documents and so on (Art. 657-2), are appropriate.
4. That the Draft extends extinctive prescription period of the claim of the amount insured to 3 years from 2 years and extends extinctive prescription period of the claim of premium to 2 years from 1 year (Art. 662), is proper.
5. That the Draft regulates newly the effect of default of duty to notify double insurance (Art. 672-2 Para. 2), is not necessary. It can be stipulated in Art.
651-2 together.
6. That the Draft regulates newly the effect of default of duty to notify the assignment of the subject-matter of insurance (Art. 679 Para. 2·Para. 3), is not necessary.
7. The present Article 680 saying that the insurer always shall be liable to pay the necessary or advantageous expenses to prevent a loss, should be kept up.
Therefore, the Draft Article 680 Para. 2 and Para. 3 which the Draft changes the above present provision, should be deleted.
8. That the Draft restricts the subrogation right of insurer to the family members of the person effecting the insurance or the insured (Art. 682 Para. 2), is reasonable.
9. That the Draft stipulates newly the guaranty insurance (Art. 726-5, 726-6, 726-7), is proper.
10. That the Draft regulates newly the amount insured to be paid separately in all contracts of person insurance (Art. 727 Para. 2), is proper. But the word “as an annuity”should be inserted in Art. 727 Para. 2 by my opinion.
11. That the Draft deletes Art. 735 (Endowment Insurance) and Art. 735-2 (Annuity Insurance), is proper.
12. That the Draft permits a feeble-minded person to effect the insurance and to consent as the insured (Art. 732), is improper.
13. That the Draft regulates newly the reasons for which the life (death) insurer is relieved of liability in detail (Art. 732-2), is appropriate.
14. That the Draft regulates newly the effect of default of duty to notify any other life insurance(s) (Art. 732-3 Para. 2), is not necessary. It can be stipulated in Art. 651-2 together.
15. The newly regulated (by the Draft) provision saying that a half of the amount insured of life (death) insurance is exempted from attachment (Art. 734-2), is proper.
16. The newly regulated provision (Art. 735-3 Para. 3) saying that the written consent of the insured should be required if the person effecting the insurance orders any other person except the insured as beneficiary in group insurance, is improper.
17. The newly regulated provision saying that the policy conditions concerning exemption of liability of the insurer in case of no license or drunken drive and so on are valid (Art. 737-2), is proper.
18. The newly regulated provision saying that the provisions concerning property insurance shall apply mutatis mutandis to personal accident insurance which has the character of property insurance (Art. 739 Para. 2), is very proper.
19. That the Draft regulates newly provisions concerning sickness insurance (Art. 739-2, 739-3, 739-4), is very proper.

영어초록

1. That the Draft stipulates newly the principle of the utmost good faith in all insurance contracts (Art. 638 Para. 2), is very reasonable.
2. The newly regulated (by the Draft) powers of insurance agent, insurance broker or insurance salesman (Art. 646-2) are required to be stipulated in more detail and correctly.
3. The newly regulated Articles saying that the insurance contract by fraud is invalid (Art. 655-2) and the insurer does not have any obligation against the claim of the amount insured by fraud or forged documents and so on (Art. 657-2), are appropriate.
4. That the Draft extends extinctive prescription period of the claim of the amount insured to 3 years from 2 years and extends extinctive prescription period of the claim of premium to 2 years from 1 year (Art. 662), is proper.
5. That the Draft regulates newly the effect of default of duty to notify double insurance (Art. 672-2 Para. 2), is not necessary. It can be stipulated in Art.
651-2 together.
6. That the Draft regulates newly the effect of default of duty to notify the assignment of the subject-matter of insurance (Art. 679 Para. 2·Para. 3), is not necessary.
7. The present Article 680 saying that the insurer always shall be liable to pay the necessary or advantageous expenses to prevent a loss, should be kept up.
Therefore, the Draft Article 680 Para. 2 and Para. 3 which the Draft changes the above present provision, should be deleted.
8. That the Draft restricts the subrogation right of insurer to the family members of the person effecting the insurance or the insured (Art. 682 Para. 2), is reasonable.
9. That the Draft stipulates newly the guaranty insurance (Art. 726-5, 726-6, 726-7), is proper.
10. That the Draft regulates newly the amount insured to be paid separately in all contracts of person insurance (Art. 727 Para. 2), is proper. But the word “as an annuity”should be inserted in Art. 727 Para. 2 by my opinion.
11. That the Draft deletes Art. 735 (Endowment Insurance) and Art. 735-2 (Annuity Insurance), is proper.
12. That the Draft permits a feeble-minded person to effect the insurance and to consent as the insured (Art. 732), is improper.
13. That the Draft regulates newly the reasons for which the life (death) insurer is relieved of liability in detail (Art. 732-2), is appropriate.
14. That the Draft regulates newly the effect of default of duty to notify any other life insurance(s) (Art. 732-3 Para. 2), is not necessary. It can be stipulated in Art. 651-2 together.
15. The newly regulated (by the Draft) provision saying that a half of the amount insured of life (death) insurance is exempted from attachment (Art. 734-2), is proper.
16. The newly regulated provision (Art. 735-3 Para. 3) saying that the written consent of the insured should be required if the person effecting the insurance orders any other person except the insured as beneficiary in group insurance, is improper.
17. The newly regulated provision saying that the policy conditions concerning exemption of liability of the insurer in case of no license or drunken drive and so on are valid (Art. 737-2), is proper.
18. The newly regulated provision saying that the provisions concerning property insurance shall apply mutatis mutandis to personal accident insurance which has the character of property insurance (Art. 739 Para. 2), is very proper.
19. That the Draft regulates newly provisions concerning sickness insurance (Art. 739-2, 739-3, 739-4), is very proper.

참고자료

· 없음