저작자표시 - 비영리 - 변경금지 2.0 대한민국 이용자는아래의조건을따르는경우에한하여자유롭게 이저작물을복제, 배포, 전송, 전시, 공연및방송할수있습니다. 다음과같은조건을따라야합니다 : 저작자표시. 귀하는원저작자를표시하여야합니다. 비영리. 귀하는이저작물을영리목적으로이용할

Transcription

1 저작자표시 - 비영리 - 변경금지 2.0 대한민국 이용자는아래의조건을따르는경우에한하여자유롭게 이저작물을복제, 배포, 전송, 전시, 공연및방송할수있습니다. 다음과같은조건을따라야합니다 : 저작자표시. 귀하는원저작자를표시하여야합니다. 비영리. 귀하는이저작물을영리목적으로이용할수없습니다. 변경금지. 귀하는이저작물을개작, 변형또는가공할수없습니다. 귀하는, 이저작물의재이용이나배포의경우, 이저작물에적용된이용허락조건을명확하게나타내어야합니다. 저작권자로부터별도의허가를받으면이러한조건들은적용되지않습니다. 저작권법에따른이용자의권리는위의내용에의하여영향을받지않습니다. 이것은이용허락규약 (Legal Code) 을이해하기쉽게요약한것입니다. Disclaimer

2

3

4

5 보험계약상설명의무에관한연구 (VVG) EU (PEICL) ,.,,, ( ). - i -

6 .,,,....,,, ,. 주제어 : 보험자의설명의무, 약관규제에관한법률제 3 조, 상법제 638 조의 2. 보험업법제 95 조의 2, 금융소비자보호법안. - ii -

7 iii -

8 (1) 22 (2) 24 (3) 25 (4) (1) 31 - iv -

9 (2) 33 (3) 33 (4) 34 4 EU PEICL PEICL 35 (1) 35 (2) 36 (3) 37 (4) PEICL (1) (PEICL 2:201 ) 39 (2) (PEICL 2:202 ) 40 (3) (PEICL 2:203 ) (1) (PEICL 2:203 ) 41 (2) v -

10 1., 43 (1) 44 (2) 45 2., 46 (1) / 47 (2) (1) 50 (2) (1) 53 (2) 54 (3) 54 (4) 55 (5) vi -

11 (CSR) (1) 66 (2) 67 (3) 67 (4) 67 (5) 68 (6) (1) 69 (2) 69 (3) 70 (4) 72 (5) 73 (6) vii -

12 (1) 76 (2) 77 (3) 78 (4) 79 (5) 81 (6) ( ) 85 (1) 85 (2) viii -

13 (1) 98 (2) (1) 99 (2) 100 (3) 100 (4) 101 (5) 101 (6) (1) 102 (2) 102 (3) 102 (4) 103 (5) 103 (6) 103 (7) 103 (8) ix -

14 (1) 107 (2) 109 (3) 109 (4) (1) 111 (2) 111 (3) (1) x -

15 (2) Abstract xi -

16 . 1).,. 2).. 3).... ( 4 ). 1),,, 2005, 21. 2), 2,, 2013, 1 ;, ( ) 16, 2014,, 494 ;, 4,, 2014, ) Malcolm Clarke, Policies and Perceptions of Insurance Law in the Twenty-First Century, Oxford University Press, 2007, pp

17 . 47 ( ), 14 ( ). 3 ( ) 638 3( ) 4). 95 2( )... 5)..,..,., (bargaining power), 4) ( ). 5),. ( ). ( )..,, 12,, 2014,

18 . 6),, ( ).....,.,... 6) ( 3 4 ).,,, 2012,

19 ......,

20 7) , , ( ). 4.., (Versicherungsvertragsgesetz; VVG), EU (Principles of European Insurance Contract Law; PEICL), ,, , ) ( 2 20 ). ( 663 )

21 45 2,.. 6.,..,,,,.,,, westlaw

22 .,,,. 8) (source of law). 9)... 10),,, ) (common law). 8),, 47 ;,, ),, ),, ), 8,, 2007, 19 ;,, 48 ;,, 63 ;,,

23 . (conditions), (, warranties). 12). 13) 1779 Lloyd's.. (1) 보험계약체결의편의성,.. 14) (2) 보험계약의평등성.,,. 15) 12) John Lowry Philip Rawlings Rob Merkin, Insurance Law: Doctrines and principles, 3rd ed., Hart Publishing Ltd., 2011, p ) warranty,. State Trading Corporation of India v. M Golodez Ltd[1989] 2 Lloyd's Rep 277; Lowry et al, Ibid. 14),, 509 ;, ( ) 4,, 2011,

24 ... ( 5 ).,. 16).,,,,,, 15), 7,, 2013, ),, 510 ;,,

25 ,,.,. 17) 7.,,, ( ),,, ( ) ), 2. 17),, ) , 2, 1, 1, 1, 1,

26 ..,,, 19). 20). 21), ( 4 ), (principle of utmost good faith) 22) ( 5 1 ), 19) 2,, ),, 57~63.,,,,,,,. 21),, ). Lowry et al, op.cit., pp. 265~

27 , 23) ( 5 1 ), ( 5 2 ) 24).,,,, (principle of ejusdem generis), 25).,. 23) ( )., 1, 11,, 2014, Bradley D. Liggett, "Contra applicantem or contra proferentem applicatio: The need for clarification of the doctrine of contra proferentem in the context of insures-created ambiguities in insurance applications", Brigham Young University Law Review(2008) pp. 213~214; 1806 (United States v. Hedh, 7 U.S.(3 Cranch)399, 409(1806)). Kenneth S. Abraham, Insurance Law and Regulation. Cases and Materials, 4th ed., Foundation Press of Thomson/West, 2005, p ) Alianz Marine Aviation(France) v GE Frankona Reindurance Ltd London[2005] EWHC 101; Lowry et al, op.cit., p

28 . 26),. 27)28). 29),.,., 26),, ),, 50 ;,, ) ,. 29),,,,, ;,,, 2002,

29 ,,. 30). 31).,. 32) ,. 33),,. 34), 30) ),, ),, 50 ;,, ),, 511 ;,, 50~51. 34),

30 . 35). 36) ) 38).. 39). 3 40). 35),, ),, ),, 511 ;,, 50~51. 38),, 2001, 144 ;, 3, 2002, 40 ;, ( ),, 2001, 63 ; 2,, 22 ;,, 512 ;,, 237 ;, ),, 51 ; 2,, 21~25 ;,, ) 3,

31 .. 41) 42),. 43). 44).,,. 45). 41), ( ),, 2002, ),, ),, ),, ) ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

32 638 2, ) 46),, 53 ;,, 512~513,, 638 3,

33 ..,.., (Marine Insurance Act; MIA) , 47)., ),,, 2013, 93~

34 48),... 49)...., ). 51) 48) Thomas J. Schoenbaum, The Duty Of Utmost Good Faith In Marine Insurance Law: A Comparative Analysis Of American And English Law, Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce, 1998, p ),, 48,, 2012, ) John Lowry, Whither the duty of good faith in UK insurance contracts, Connecticut Insurance Law Journal Vol. 16, Connecticut University, 2009, p

35 Carter v. Boehm 52) Mansfield. 53), 54) Mansfield.,. 55) 17 56).. Banque Keyser Ullmann S.A. v. Skandia Insurance Co. 57). 58) Slade 51),, Juris Forum 1 1, 1998, 1. 52) Carter v. Boehm, (1766) 97 Eng. Rep. 1162, pp (Governor) Gorge Carter Boehm Lord Mansfield. Carter.,,. 53) John Lowry, p. 98; Jan Woloniecki, The Duty Of Utmost Good Faith In Insurance Law: Where Is It In The 21St Century?, Defense Counsel Journal, 2002, p ) John Bird, Modern Insurance Law(8th ed.), Sweet&Maxwell, 2010, p ),,, 2004, ) MIA 17 A contract of Marine insurance is based upon the utmost good faith, and if the utmost good faith be not observed by either party, the contract may be avoided by the other party. 57) [1987] 1 Lloyd's Rep.69; Birds, op. cit., p ) Ballestero

36 . 59). 60) 20 Re Bradley and Essex and Suffolk Accident Indemnity Society 61) Farwell. Horry v. Tate & Lyle Refineries Ltd. 62).,,,.,,,.,,...,, 6 2,, 2009, 327 ;, - Skandia, 17 2,, 1998, ),.,,,.,,, 1993, 543~ ), ( 51), 4. 61) Re Bradley and Essex and Suffolk Accident Indemnity Society[1912] 1 KB 415(CA) 62) Horry v. Tate & Lyle Refineries Ltd.[1982] 2 Lloyd's Rep.416, QBD

37 18 ~ 20,. 63) (English and Scottish Commissions) ) (1) 범위 1) 판례를통한검토 ), Carter v. Boehm Mansfield, 63),, ) Lowry, op. cit.. pp. 126~ ), ( 55),

38 . Skandia Steyn (good faith and fair dealing). Skandia 2, Steyn ,,., Jauncey 2 66),. 67) 2) 범위의검토 Skandia., 66) Rhidian Thomas, Marine Insurance: The Law in Transition, Informa Pub, 2006, p ), ( 55), 290~

39 1 2, Januency. 1, ),,,,,,,. 69). 70) (2) 이행시기 21.,..,., 68),, 2011, 8. 69),, 2011, 9 ; Peter MacDonald Eggers Simon Picken Patrick Foos, Good Faith and Insurance Contracts, Informa, 2010, pp. 289~ ), ( 55), 307~

40 .,. 71) (3) 의무위반의효과 1) 손해배상청구,,.,. 72),. Skandia Steyn 73). 1 손해배상청구권반대론의근거. 71), ( 55), 131~ ),, ), ( 55),

41 . M.I.A ~ ) 2 손해배상청구권반대론의비판..,. 75) Skandia 2. 2,,, 4. 76) (4) 계약체결후의의무 18 20, ) ), ( 55), ), ( 55), ),, ),, 21 4, 2010,

42 , Chalmer The Liston Pride 78) Hirst,,,...,,. 79) ,, EU 78) Black King Shipping Corp. v. Massie(The Listsion Pride) [1985] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 437; (1984)134 N.L.J.887, QBD(Comm); Birds, op.cit., pp. 155~ ), ( 55),

43 , EU.. 80) 7. 81),. 82),,,,,,,..,. 7 1 l 2 2.., 80),, 25 4,, 2009, ), 2009,, 2009, 113~ ),, 11 4,, 2010,

44 ,,. 83) 7 2 2,,,.,,,,.,,.,,,,,.,. 84) ) ),, 23 2,, 2009, ), ( 83), ),, 11 1,, 2012,

45 b.,, SMS.. 86) 87) 88)., ) 86),, ),.. 5 a 1 10 a, , ( 80), 233 ; ;, 26 3,, 2012, ), ;, (CFR) (PEICL), 34 3,, 2010, 23~24. 89),,

46 , 2 2..,. 90)..,,,. 91) (1) 철회권 1) 의의 8 l l 2, ,. 2) 효과 ), ( 83), ), ( 83),

47 1 1,.,., , ,., ,,.,

48 .... 3) 철회권의배제 ,,..,. (2) 보험료반환청구권,. 30,. 92) (3) 손해배상청구권, ),, Vol.79 No.4,, 2008,

49 .,..,,. 93) (4) 감독법상의조치 ) (Treaty of European Community : EC ) 2003 (European Economic and Social Committee : EESC) Restatement of European Insurance Contact Law (Restatement Group) 93), ( 92), ),,, 2011,

50 , (European Commission) (The Common Frame of Reference : CFR),. 95) CFR. (Principle of European Contract Law: PECL) CFR, (Princlple of European Insurance Contract Law: PEICL). PEICL (1) 적용범위 PEICL 1: ) (, ) 1:103 2 PEICL. 97) 95), EU (1),, 2007, 30~31. 96) PEICL 1:101(Substantive Scope of Application) : (1) The PEICL shall apply to private insurance in general, including mutual insurance. (2) The PEICL shall not apply to reinsurance. 97) PEICL 1:103 (Mandatory Character) (2) The contract may derogate from all other provisions of the PEICL as long as such derogation is not to the detriment of the policyholder, the insured or beneficiary. However, derogation shall be allowed to the benefit of any party in contracts covering (a) risks in classes 4, 5, 6, 7, 11 or 12 of the Annex to this Article; 1 Articles 1:102 sentence 2, 2:104 and 13:101 are the only mandatory provisions so

51 . PEICL. PEICL 1:105,. PEICL 1:105 2,. 98) (2) 집행, PEICL. PEICL 2:201 1 k 2:205 k,. 99) far; however further mandatory articles are anticipated in future Articles on specific branches of insurance. (b) risks in classes 14 or 15 of the Annex to this Article, when the policyholder is engaged professionally in an industrial or commercial activity or in one of the liberal professions, and the risks relate to such activity; (c) risks in classes 3, 8, 9, 10, 13 or 16 of the Annex to this Article, in so far as the policyholder exceeds the limits of at least two of the following three criteria: - balance-sheet total: 6.2 million euros. - net turnover: 12.8 million euros. - average number of employees during the financial year: ) PEICL 1:105 (National Law and General Principles) (1) No recourse to national law, whether to restrict or to supplement the PEICL, shall be permitted. This does not apply to mandatory national laws specifically enacted for branches of insurance which are not covered by special rules contained in the PEICL. (2) Questions arising from the insurance contract, which are not expressly settled in the PEICL, are to be settled in conformity with the Principles of European Contract Law (PECL) 3 and, in the absence of relevant rules in that instrument, in accordance with the general principles common to the laws of the Member States. 99), CFR, 33 3,

52 (3) 선택사항,.. 100) PEICL. PEICL 1:102 PEICL 1:103 PEICL,. 101)102). PEICL,. 103). 104) (4) 강행성,, 2009, ), ( 88), ) PEICL 1:102 (Optional Application) : The PEICL shall apply when the parties, notwithstanding any limitations of choice of law under private international law, have agreed that their contract shall be governed by them. Subject to Article 1:103, the PEICL shall apply as a whole and no exclusion of particular provisions shall be allowed. 102), CFR, 26 3,, 2009, 56~ ), ( 88), ), ( 102),

53 .. PEICL..,. PEICL 1: ).,, PEICL PEICL. 106) PEICL , 4. PEICL 1 1.,. 2,,,,, ) PEICL 1:103 : (2) The contract may derogate from all other provisions of the PEICL as long as such derogation is not to the detriment of the policyholder, the insured or beneficiary. 106), ( 88),

54 . 5, 6, 1 7. PEICL 2,,,,. PEICL ) PEICL 2 2, ,. PEICL 2:201 2:203. (1) 계약성립전서류에대한규정 (PEICL 제2:201 조 ) PEICL 2: ), ( 99),

55 (PEICL 2:201 1 ). a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i j. k... (PEICL 2:201 2 ). ( ), (PEICL 2:201 3 ). (2) 보험상담보불일치에대하여설명할의무 (PEICL 제2:202 조 ). 108) PEICL 2: ), ( 88),

56 ,. (a), (b) 2. (3) 보험보장의개시시점에대하여알려줄의무 (PEICL 제2:203 조 ),.. PEICL 7 2:201 2:202.,. 109) (1) 일반적정보제공의무 (PEICL 제 2:203 조 ), 109), ( 88),

57 ,. (2) 청구에따른추가정보,. a. b ). PEICL 2:202.,., ), ( 88),

58 , ,,. 111) 6, ).,.,,. 111),, 28 4,, 2010, 9~ ) ,,, 2008, pp

59 (1) 보험법상의설명의무. 6, ( 6 ) ( 40 ) ( 69 ),,,. 2008,,. 113). 113), ( 111),

60 . 114) (2) 보험업법상의설명의무 ,. 115) ( 317 2) ( ). 116), ),, 2010, p ), ( ) 116), -, No.1999( ), pp. 124~

61 ( )..,.,, ,,, ) (Bussiness Act) 117),, 28 2,, 2011,

62 . (1) 금융상품등의판매에관한법률 / 금융상품거래법상의설명의무 ( 2 4 ). 3 ~ ),,,. 6 1,.. 119). 120) ,,, ), ( 111), ),, 8 1,, 2007, ),,

63 ,,. 121) (2) 소비자계약법상의설명의무 ),,. 123),.,,,. 124). 125) 121),, ), ( 111), 40 ;,, ),, ),, ), 2010, 2010,, 2010,

64 ,,,. 126) ( ) ) ( ). 128) 2002 WTO 126),,, 2005, ) , ( ) ( ) ( , ) ( ) ( ), ( ) ( , ), ( ) ( ). (, ), (, ), (, ), (, ), (, ), ( ), ( ), ( ), ( ). ( ), ( ). 128),, 42,, 2011,

65 1. 129) 1,,. 130) ,.,,, (, ). 131) (1) 통일된법체계. 132),. ( ). 133) 129) ),,, 2009, ), ( 128), 275 ;, 2009, 29,, 2009, )., ( ).. 133),... 房永斌 孙运英, 保险法规监管, 中国人民

66 .,.,... (2) 보험및보험계약의정의 1 ( ), 2.,. 134) 2,,,, 135)., ) 2 10 大学出版社, 2004, 60 頁. 134),,,. 国务院法制办公室, 中华人民共和国商务贸易法典, 中国法制出版社, 2012, 72 頁. 135) 2 ;,, 13,, 2010, ) 2 ( ) 1 ( ) ( )

67 2, ),. 138) ,. 139),. 137) ) 638 ( ). 139) ( ), : 6%, ( ) ( )

68 .. 140) ,. 141) (1) 이행주체 ).,.,. 140),, 33,, 2011, 239~ ),, ) 17,.,,. ;,, 21 2,, 2012,

69 (2) 법적성격 ,.. (3) 이행방법 ,.,,.. 143). 144) 143),... ; 胡洋, 以典型案例探讨保险人的说明义务, 山西財經大學學報 第 13 卷第 1 期, 山西財經大學, 2013, 22 頁. 144),,

70 ..,. 145) ( ) ),, ( ). (4) 범위 2009., 17 ( ), ). 7,.. 148) 145),, ) ( ) 39, 40, 41,. ( ) 39 1 :. 147),,

71 . 149) 150) ).,,.,, ) (5) 의무위반의효과 18,. 148),, ), 2009, 15,, 2011, ) 最高人民法院法研 ( < > 17 ),,. ( 认为 明确说明 是指保险人在与投保人签订保险合同之前或者签订保险合同之时, 对于保险合同中所约定的免责条款, 除了在保险单上提示投保人注意外, 还应当对有关对免责条款的概念 内容及其法律后果等, 以书面或者口头形式向投保人或其代理人作出解释, 以使投保人明了该条款的真实含义和法律后果 ) 151),, 5,, 2007, 206~ ),,

72 .,. 153). 154)..,,..,..,, EU,, 153) 胡洋, 前揭論文, 22 頁. 154) 王益华 张玉霞 张义, 保险人明确说明义务问题的法律适用, 人民司法 应用, 最高人民法院, 2010, 43 頁

73 ., EU 2:201~202, 2: ,,. EU,. EU.,

74 ..,,. EU 2.., EU

75 ) , ) ),, 52 2,, 2011, ) (2013) ( ) [ ], [ : ]

76 ,. ( ).,,.. 157) ).., 157),, 20 3,, 2007, ),, 24 3,, 2010,

77 ...,. 159),,..., ),, 508 ;,, 4,, 2009,

78 ..,..., )..,,,,.,..,.., 160),,

79 .. 161). 162) (Corporate Social Responsibility : CSR).,..., , % 37,196...,,,., 161) ), (Wall Street), 309,, 2011,

80 .,... CSR. 163) CSR. CSR., CSR ), LIG CSR CSR( ),,, 2010, 419~

81 ( ).. (1) 의의 (.). 3.,

82 3. 164) (2) 약관작성시의의무 ( 3 1 ).,. (3) 이행시기및방법 3 2,, 165) (4) 이행당사자 ( 2 2 ). ( 2 2 )., 164),,, 2012, ),,

83 ,. (5) 의무의범위 1) 설명의대상,. 2) 설명의정도 ( 3 3 ). (6) 의무위반의효과 1) 약관의편입통제 3 4.,. 2) 과태료의부과 ) 166)

84 (1) 의의 ),. 168) 169),. 170) (2) 이행시기및방법 1) 이행시기 ) 2, 2 1., 1 205, ;,, ) 638 3( ) ), ), ( 2), ),, ), ( 2),

85 . 172),. 173) 2) 이행방법.. 174),. 175). (3) 이행당사자 1) 설명의무의이행자,... ( 10 ) ( 756 ), ( 102 )., 176) 172),, 508 ;, ( 2), ),, ) ; ; ; ; ), ( 2), ) ,

86 .,, )..,.. 178) ) 2) 설명의무의이행의상대방. ( 646 ). ( ),. 180) 177) ; ( ). 178),, ) 2,, 78 ;,, ), ( 2), 149 ;,, 518 ;,,,

87 (4) 의무의범위.. 1) 설명의대상.. 181)., ( ) ( ). 182). 183),,,,,,,,,. 184),. 185). 181) Malcolm A. Clarke, The Law of Insurance Contracts(2th ed.), Informa Pub, 1994, p ) ), ( 2), 150 ;,, ), ( 2), 150 ;,, 113 ;,,

88 ,. 2) 설명의정도 ) (5) 입증책임.. 185) ,,,. 186), ( 2),

89 .. 187).,,. 188) (6) 의무위반의효과 1) 보험계약자의취소권 ,. 189) ), 187), ( 2), ) ; ),, ),,

90 3. 191) ( 141 ) 192) ( 648 ). ( ) 193).. 194) ) 고지의무위반과의관계 ( 651 ) , 3 191) ) 141 ( )., ( ). 193) 748 ( ). 194),

91 ....,. 195).. 196). 197) (1) 의의 195),, 14 2,, 1995, ),, 510 ;,, 37,, 2010, ) ; ; ; ; ; ;

92 .,,,..., ),., (2) 이행시기및방법 1) 이행시기 , 198) 97 ( ). 1. ( )

93 ,. (2) 이행방법.. 199) (3) 이행당사자 , 95 2., ( ). ( ) ) ,

94 2., ( 2 19 ).,. 200) (4) 의무의범위 1) 설명의대상 ) ),., 200),, 10 1,, 2013, ),, ),,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

95 ( ) ( ). 203) ( )., ,,, ,,,,..., ,. ( ).. 204),, 203) ),,, 2012,

96 ( ).,,. 2) 설명의정도.. (5) 입증책임. 1,,, ( ).,,. (6) 의무위반의효과 1) 과징금부과 ( ).,

97 ( ). 2) 과태료 ( ) ( ). 5, , ) 손해배상의무 1 의의및법적성질, ( )., ). 206) ) 756 ( ) ) ; ;

98 102 1 ( ) 756.,. 207) ,. 208) 2 입법취지 209).,. 3 요건 207),, ) ( 102 ),. 209),, 23 2,, 2011,

99 . 210),,.,. 4 내용 ). ( ) ( 102, 766 ). 211) ) ) 210),, ) 766 ( ) )

100 . 213) ( 731 ). 214),. 30% 40% 215). 216) (1) 의의 ( ) [ ( )] ( ) 213) ) ; , ; , ; ; ;,, ) ; ; , ; , ),,

101 . 217) ,.,,,, ( 3 1 ). ( ) ).,,, )., 217),, 44 1,, 2013, ) 2 1,, ) ( ) 2 7,,,,

102 . (2) 설명의무의내용 ( ), 15.,. 220) 1) 설명의무자 ( ) 15., ). 2) 설명하여야하는사항 ( ) ),, ) ( ) 2 10, ( ,.),.,.,,

103 . 15 ( 15 3 ). 3) 설명의정도.,. ( 15 3 ).,,,, ( 15 2 )., ( 15 4 ). 4) 위반시의법적책임 ). 222) ( ) 12 ( ) ( ), ( )

104 ( 750 ). 223),. 224), ( ).. 225).,. 223),, ),, ),,, 2008,

105 . 226). 227).. 15,,,,,,...,. 228), ( ). 226),, ),, 4 1,, 2005, ),,, 2006,

106 11.,..,. 229),.. 230) ( 3 2 )., ( ) 1 ( 3 2 ), ),, YGBL 3 2,, 2011, ) 18, 20, 17, 17 2, 2, 30,

107 ., ( )...,.,.,,,,.,,

108 , ( )..,.,...,

109 ..., ( ) ( ) , ),, 231),, 65,, 2014,

110 . 3. ( ),. 232), ) 234),,, 232) ( ) 15 ( ) ( ). 1 ( ) ),, 25,, 2007, ),, 123 ;,,

111 ). 236) ( ), 235) ),, 3,, 2014,

112 .....,..,

113 . 237) ( ). (1) 보험계약자의계약취소권문제, ) 1 3., ),, 26 1,, 2013, ) ~ ~ ~ 1 1 ~ (0.8%) (3.9%) (7.5%) (23.9%) (31.8%) (32.1%) (100%) ( :, 2010 ) 1 4.7% ;,,

114 (2) 손해배상.., 102 1, ( ) 12,. (1) 주운전자제도관련조항.,, ) 239),,,, 2010,

115 ,. 240) (2) 운전자한정운전특별약관 ) 242). 158, ) (3) 다른자동차운전담보특별약관상면책사유. 244). 240) ; ; ; ; ; ) ; ; ) ) ) ,

116 245). (4) 자기신체사고담보시보상조항,, 246). (5) 피보험자동차양도시보험계약의승계 247) ) (6) 영업용자동차관련면책사항,,,. 249) 250) 251). 245) ; ) ) ) ) ; )

117 (1) 위험을수반하는행위동안생긴손해의면책조항,.,. (2) 무면허운전면책조항 252),. (3) 후유장해율관련보험금산정기준의예외조항,. 253) 251) ) )

118 (4) 암보험계약에서치료전력에대한고지의무 5 7,. 254) (5) 재해보험상오토바이운전자의보험가입배제 10 1 ( ) 255). (6) 타인의사망보험계약상타인의서면동의, ) (7) 피보험자의직업변경, ( ) 254) ) ) ;

119 . 257) (8) 변액보험에서의설명사항 258) 259) 2 3.,,..,. 260). 261) 257) ; :,, 9,, 2014, ) ), ;,,,, 1,, 2014, 45~ ) ;,., ( 259),

120 . 262) ( ).,. 263). 264). 265)., 261),, 10 2,, 2013, 101~ ) , ),, 115.,,. 264) )

121 ,. 266).,,,, ) 2 268)..,,, 266) ) )

122 .. 269)..,..,. 270) (1) 자동차보험. 271) 269),, 11,, 2013, ), ( 269), 52~ )

123 . 272). 273) 1 2,,. 274),, ) ) )

124 . (2) 화재보험, ( ), ( ). 275) (3) 상해보험. 276) (4) 인보험 12% 275) )

125 , 12%. 277) ( ),. 278),. 279), 277) ) )

126 . 280). (1) 자동차보험및화재보험의위험변경ㆍ증가통지의무조항 ( ) 281) 282) (2) 자동차운전면허종별운전가능차종 283),. (3) 수출어음보험약관상수출계약의의미 284) 280) ) ) , ) )

127 ,,,....,.,,...,.,.,

128 . 285). 286).. 287),. 288).. / 289),., EU. 285), ( 257), ) , , ),,, 2010, ),,,, 2013, ),,

129 ., ( ).,. 290),..,.. 290) :,,, 2009, 71 ;, ( 2), 150 ;, , 59, 2001, 135 ;,,, 2004, 50 ;,,, 2011, 38 ;,, 89 ;,,, 11 2, 2005, 140 ;,, 114 ;,,, 2011,

130 ,..,.,,. ( ).,,,. ( ).,

131 291),,. ( ). 292),. ( 7 1 ).,,.,.. 293) 291),, 12 2,, 2011, 43~ ),,

132 294),. 295). 296),.. 297) ( ) 298) 293) , ),,. 295) ;,, 65,, 2014, 56~ ),,,.( 18, 2, 17, 2, 2 ). 297),, 2014, ) 39, 2,

133 .. 299).. 300).,....,. 299) , ), ( 2), 153 ;,,

134 ., ),. 302),,,. 303).,. ( ) 301),, ),, ),,

135 ,. 304),. 305). ( ),,,..,,, 306). 307) 304),, 65 ;,, ),., 537,, 2001, ) ;

136 ., ) ( )., ( 15 3 ). 307) ), ( 237),

137 ..,,.,, , ) , ) 141 ( )., ( )

138 . 3. (1) 상법단독적용설 ).. 1) 특별법우선의원칙및신법우선의원칙, ,. 310), ( 2),

139 ) ) 2) 보험계약의단체적성격과보험계약자평등대우의원칙., ) 일반적취소권의법리,., ), ( 2), 165 ;,, ),,

140 3. 313) (2) 중첩적용설 638 3,. 314),. 315). 1) 두규정사이의관계, ,, ) 개별보험계약자의보호 313), ( 2), ),, ), ( 2),

141 ..,. 316).. 3) 약관규제법제30조제2항의적용 ,.,. 317) 316),, ), ( 61),

142 ,. 318) , )...,. 318) ; ; ; ) ; ,

143 )., 321)...,, 1, , ),, ) 2,,

144 ., 3..,,. 322),. 323).,, ), ;, ( 188), ),,

145 ) ),..,. 328),.,.,,,. 329) 324) , (2),, 2007, ), 2014, 24 4, 2014, 107~ ), ( 237). 93 ;,,,, 2013, ) ),,,, 2013, ), ( 326), 5 [ ( 93 ), ( 117 ), ( 126 ),

146 .,,..,..., ( )., ( 127 ), ( 130 ) ], [ ( 4 ), ( 9 ), ( 78 ), ( 84, 86 ), ( 87, 88 ), ( 89, 90 ) ], [ ( 95 4), ( 95 5), ( 96 ), ( 97 ), ( 98 ), ( 99 ), ( 127 ) ], [ ( 133 ), ( 134 ) ], ( 13 )., ( 3 ), ( 95 2), ( 95 3), ( 101 ), ( 113 ), ( 116 ). ( 102 ), ( 102 2), ( 103 )

147 ..,.. 330).., ( ),.. 330),, 23 2,, 2011,

148 . 331) GA ) ( ) 12,.,. ( )..,. 333) 331), ( 237), 99 ;, ( 313), ), ( 5), ), 2010, 11,, 2011, 19~

149 .,,, ( ) ).,.,. 335),, 334),, 2013, ),, 2013,

150 . 336) 336),, 2014,

151 .,..,....,..,,. (VVG) EU

152 (PEICL) ,, ( ) ,,., EU

153 ......,.,,., ( ).., ( )

154 1 ( 3.)....,.,,., ,..,. GA

155 .....,..,,..,

156 ,,, 2008.,,, 2009.,, 2001., 2,, 2013.,,, 2004., EU (1),, 2007.,,, 2004.,,, 2012.,,, 2011., ( ),, 1996., ( ),, 2002.,,, 2012., 4,, 2014.,,, 2005.,,, 2006.,,, 2013., 8,, 2008., 2009,, 2009.,,, 2006.,,,

157 ,, 2,, 2015.,,, 2010., ( ) 4,, 2011.,,, 2002., ( ) 16,, 2014., ( ),, 2001., 3, 2002.,,, 2014., 7,, 2013.,,, 2011.,,, 2011., LIG CSR CSR( ),,, 2010., 2009, 15,, 2011.,, 4,, 2009.,, 28 2,, 2011.,,, 1993.,,,,

158 ,, 10 2,, 2013.,,,, 1,, 2014.,, 9,, 2014.,, 12,, 2014., 1, 11,, 2014., 2014, 24 4,, 2014.,, 9,, 2014.,, 11,, 2013.,, 28 4,, 2010.,, 3,, 2014.,, 65,, 2014.,, 48,, 2012., 2009, 29,, 2009.,, 25 4,

159 , 2009.,, 23 2,, 2009.,,, 20 3, 2007., (CFR) (PEICL), 34 3,, 2010.,, 25,, 2007., CFR, 33 3,, 2009., CFR, 26 3,, 2009.,, 33,, 2011.,, 537,, 2001.,,,, 2010.,, 26 1,, 2013.,, 44 1,, 2013.,, Juris Forum 1 1, 1998., - Skandia, 17 2,, 1998., , 59,

160 ,, 13,, 2010.,, 42,, 2011.,, 21 2,, 2012.,, 5, 2007.,, 24 3,, 2010.,, 65,, 2014.,, 37,, 2010., (Wall Street), 309,, 2011., 2010, 11, 2011.,, 11 4,, 2010.,, 79 4,, 2008.,, 26 3,, 2012.,, 10 1,, 2013.,, 52 2,,

161 ,, 6 2,, 2009.,, 4 1,, 2005.,, 12 2,, 2011.,,,,, 2013.,, YGBL 3 2,, 2011.,,, 11 2, 2005.,, 8 1,, 2007.,,,, 2013.,, 11 1,, 2012., 2010, 2010,, 2010.,, 23 2,, [ ] Bradley D. Liggett, "Contra applicantem or contra proferentem applicatio : The

162 need for clarification of the doctrine of contra proferentem in the context of insures-created ambiguities in insurance applications", Brigham Young University Law Review, Jan Woloniecki, The Duty Of Utmost Good Faith In Insurance Law :Where Is It In The 21St Century?, Defense Counsel Journal, January, John Bird, Modern Insurance Law(8th ed.), Sweet&Maxwell, John Lowry Philip Rawlings Rob Merkin, Insurance Law: Doctrines and principles, 3rd ed., Hart Publishing Ltd., John Lowry, Whither the duty of good faith in UK insurance contracts, Connecticut Insurance Law Journal Vol. 16, Connecticut University, Kenneth S. Abraham, Insurance Law and Regulation. Cases and Materials, 4th ed., Foundation Press of Thomson/West, Malcolm A. Clarke, The Law of Insurance Contracts(2th ed.), Informa Pub, 1994.,, Policies and Perceptions of Insurance Law in the Twenty-First Century, Oxford University Press, Peter MacDonald Eggers Simon Picken Patrick Foos, Good Faith and Insurance Contracts, Informa Pub, Rhidian Thomas, Marine Insurance: The Law in Transition, Informa Pub, Thomas J. Schoenbaum, The Duty Of Utmost Good Faith In Marine Insurance Law: A Comparative Analysis Of American And English Law, Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce, January [ ],,,

163 ,, 2010., -, No.1999 ( ). [ ],,, 2004.,,, 2012.,, 13 1,, 2013.,,, 2005.,, 15,, 2010.,,,

164 : 6%, ( )

165 ABSTRACT A Study on Insurer's Duty to Explanation in Insurance Contract Kim, Won Gak Graduate school of Korea University Department of Law An insurance contract is concluded by insurance contract terms which prepared by insurer. Duty to explain is to maintain contractual balance relation and to protect the interest of the insured before the insurance subscription by pre-revising the context of insurance contract. In case of Korea, there are the provisions on insurer's duty to explain in "Commercial Law", "Act on the Regulation of Standardized Contracts", "Insurance Business Law", "Bill on the Protection of Financial Consumers" and "Standardized Contract Terms of Insurance Contract". However there is a problem as there is no or ambiguous provisions on relevant regulation on the 'what is important provision of insurance terms' and 'what insurer should explain'. Thus, it is difficult to define what is important provision of insurance contract terms before the judgment of important matter. In consequence of classifying and revising up-to date important cases, it can be reached to a conclusion that there is a limitation to reliance on the cases only in the decision of the essential cases. Also, as the different regulations on the provisions on insurer's duty to explain and uncompleted legislations can cause the conflicts on laws and interpretation, legislated supplementation as follow is needed. Regarding to the implementing period, duty to explain need to be done at

166 the latest before the insured's subscription to able the insured to review and acknowledge the important matters. Regarding the implementing method, it is necessary to regulate the method by considering the differences of insurance product, solicitation for insurance and etc. Implementation of duty to explain need to reach the degree that the insured actually can acknowledge and understand. Regarding the form of the violation of duty, it has to define exaggeration, overstatement, deceit, omission of explanation as well as when it is as well as when it is not explained the important context of the clauses as the violation. In Korean Commercial law, there is no provision on the un-exercising the right of revocation when the insurers breach of the duty to explain. However, the "Act on the Regulation of Standardized Contracts" prohibit the insert of unexplained terms. Hereat, it can be considered that applying not only Commercial Law but also "Act on the Regulation of Standardized Contracts" in the intent of duty of explanation as to protect the insured. Current commercial provisions has to be modified by applying the "Act on the Regulation of Standardized Contracts". Moreover, regarding the Insurance Business Act, compensation need to be made if insured suffer losses by insurance companies due to their un implementation of the duty to explain. However, Insurance Business Act, it is an "law" that generally has the purpose of regulating the insurance business. Thus, is considered that it is appropriate to trans-regulate the provisions relevant to compensations under the Commercial Law that regulate juridical relation of the contracting parties. Thus, with the legislative solution revised above, it is necessary to academics and practices to review the introduction of the duty of providing information that the obligation of explanation is quantitatively as well as qualitatively enhanced comprehensive duty to provide information such as "Insurance Contract Law(VVG)" of Germany and the "The Principles of European

167 Insurance Contract Law"(PEICL) of EU. Key Word: Insurer's Duty of Explanation, Act on the Regulation of Standardized Contracts Art.3, Commercial act Art.638-2, Insurance Business act art.95-2, Bill on the Protection of Financial Consumers