지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
In essence, insurance on the life of another is a contract under which the insurer promises to pay proceeds upon the death of the person whose life is insured. Generally, the person who takes out life insurance on her own life or another person’s life can designate any beneficiary they choose, for example, spouses, children, a relative, etc. The contracting parties in a life insurance are not a insured and beneficiary but a insurer and policyholder. Insurance on the life of another has the risk of the unlawful activity that the insured is killed. To remove this risk, there are three type of legislation - requirement of the insurable interest, the relative or consent of the beneficiary.
The Korean Commercial Code §731(1) stipulate that, before the insurance consent, the written consent of beneficiary is required. But, actually, insurance on the life of another is signed between the insurer and policyholder before the insurance contract without obtaining the written consent of beneficiary. Absent that consent, the Supreme Court delivered judgement that contract is invalid. Also, the Supreme Court wouldn’t permit ratification, after making the insurance contract, as consent of the insured. That position of Supreme Court is too rigor to policyholder and the beneficiary, so, I think, need a adjustment of conflicting interest between insurer and beneficiary.
In conclusion, I suggest that after the insurance contract, in inter- pretation, the written consent of beneficiary is valid, and should permit ratification. Therefore, divorce between the insured and beneficiary does not automatically terminate the right of the beneficiary. But, I think, there are special reason like a divorce, beneficiary has right to claim withdrawal of consent to the policyholder.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (30)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0