보험약관의 설명의무 : 판례에 비춰 본 보험법개정안

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In August 2007, the Ministry of Justice of Korea promulgated the revision draft of Insurance Law codified in Korean Commercial Code(hereinafter "KCC").
The most dramatic change intended by the draft lies in the duty of insurer to explain the material clauses contained in the insurance policy. Korean law regulating general terms of consumer contract, enacted in 1986, requires an entrepreneur to explain the material terms, and if she or he fails to do so, the terms shall be excluded from the contract. As late as in the year of 1991,
KCC introduced an article to reverse the legal consequences of the opting out, awarding the insured the alternative right to revoke the contract or accept the clauses as a whole by waiving the right. KCC's goal was to make the opt-out method void as inconsistent with the alternative right, but Korean Supreme Court refused to follow the KCC legislative object and did not changed its attitude toward the insurer's duty to expalin the policy terms.
A viable Insurance system presupposes a considerable size of group members being subject to the same sort of disasters. Each member of the group contributes the premium and copes with the common difficulties hand in hand.
This collective nature of the insurance contracts requires insurers to deal with every insured all the same, and the general terms of insurance policy helps to this end. Even if an insurer fails to perform the duty to explain the material terms of its insurance policy, it is undesirable to allow the insured a privileged right not shared by other insureds in the same group. That is why
KCC attempts to revise the duty again by adding a passage - "if the insured does not revoke the contract, the general terms of the policy applies to the contract." In conclusion, KCC Revision Draft appears to be reasonable on this matter, but it would be worth while to watch out for the judicial resistance opposing to the radical change of the status quo.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론
• Ⅱ. 보험계약과 보험약관
• 1. 보험약관의 의의
• 2. 약관의 구속력
• Ⅲ. 보험법 개정안과 보험약관의 설명의무
• 1. 개정안의 내용
• 2. 보험약관 교부․명시의무의 개정
• Ⅳ. 보험약관의 설명의무에 관한 종전 판례의 태도
• 1. 약관 설명의무의 제도적 취지
• 2. 설명의무의 범위
• 3. 설명의 시기와 방법
• 4. 설명의무 위반의 효과
• Ⅴ. 결론
• 참고문헌

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 "합리적기대원칙과 보험약관의 본질론" 20 (20): 2006.12

2 "주제발표(2)" 서울:법무부 2007.8

3 "주운전자 제도는 과연 필요한가" 대한변호사협회 1995.8

4 "의 개정을 계기로 본 보험약관 규제 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소" 1994

5 "음주운전대행중의 자동차사고에 대한 책임관계와 보험약관의 해석 연구" 73집 : 2006.4

6 "약관명시설명의무와 고지의무의 관계" 서울 : 법문사 1999

7 "상법학신론(하)" 서울 : 박영사 2004

8 "상법 보험편 개정의 기본시각" 서울 : 법무부 2007.8

9 "보험자의 약관설명의무위반과 보험계약자의 고지의무위반의 효과" 29 (29): 1996.10

10 "보험자의 보험약관의 명시설명의무" 서울대학교법학연구소 40 (40): 1999.5

11 "보험자의 보험약관 설명의무" 영남대학교 법학연구소 11 (11): 2005

12 "보험외판원의 잘못된 설명과 개별약정의 성립" 12집 : 1990

13 "보험약관의 설명의무" 대구판례연구회 9집 : 2000.12

14 "보험약관의 명시설명의무위반과 고지의무위반으로 인한 보험계약해지 여부" 대한손해보험협회 (288) : 1992

15 "보험약관의 교부설명의무" 보험감독원 20 (20): 1997.1

16 "보험약관의 교부설명의무" 한국보험학회 46 : 1995

17 "보험법해상법" 서울 : 삼영사 2007

18 "보험모집인의 과대설명과 보험자의 책임" 2 : 1996.11

19 "Versicherungsvertragsgesetz mit PflVG und KfzPflVV Kommentar" Verlag C.H. Beck, Mnchen 2-, 2003

20 "Versicherungsvertragsgesetz" C.H. Beck, Mnchen 2004

21 "Insurance Law and Regulation Cases and Materials" Foundation Press, New York 2005