애스크로AIPublic Preview
← 학술논문 검색
학술논문경영법률2008.04 발행KCI 피인용 3

상법 제735조의3(단체보험) 조문의 해석상 문제점에 대한 소고

A study on the critical interpretation on the article 735-3(Group Insurance) of the Korean Commercial Law and the revision

박세민(고려대학교)

18권 3호, 83~112쪽

초록

The article 735-3 of the Korean Commercial Law is incomplete. The characteristic of the group insurance is the life insurance contract for third party. Therefore, in general the insured should be regarded as a beneficiary and this interpretation should be included in the article 735-3. If the policyholder designate the third party other than the insured as a beneficiary or change it, after entering into a contract, the written consent of the insured should be required. This interpretation corresponds with the nature of the group insurance and the insured can be protected. When the group obtains the written consent from the insured about the designation itself as a beneficiary, the purpose of use of the insurance money should be restricted. In addition, the duty to explain the purpose of use of the insurance money should be imposed on the policyholder. Under the current article, the interpretation should be flexible. Even though the policyholder(group) obtains the insured's consent about the designation itself as a beneficiary, the designated beneficiary(group) should be regarded as a nominal beneficiary. Therefore, after the nominal beneficiary received the insurance money, he should give it back to the insured or his surviving family. This interpretation is based on the principle of good faith and the nature of the group insurance.

Abstract

The article 735-3 of the Korean Commercial Law is incomplete. The characteristic of the group insurance is the life insurance contract for third party. Therefore, in general the insured should be regarded as a beneficiary and this interpretation should be included in the article 735-3. If the policyholder designate the third party other than the insured as a beneficiary or change it, after entering into a contract, the written consent of the insured should be required. This interpretation corresponds with the nature of the group insurance and the insured can be protected. When the group obtains the written consent from the insured about the designation itself as a beneficiary, the purpose of use of the insurance money should be restricted. In addition, the duty to explain the purpose of use of the insurance money should be imposed on the policyholder. Under the current article, the interpretation should be flexible. Even though the policyholder(group) obtains the insured's consent about the designation itself as a beneficiary, the designated beneficiary(group) should be regarded as a nominal beneficiary. Therefore, after the nominal beneficiary received the insurance money, he should give it back to the insured or his surviving family. This interpretation is based on the principle of good faith and the nature of the group insurance.

발행기관:
한국경영법률학회
분류:
법학

AI 법률 상담

이 논문의 주제에 대해 더 알고 싶으신가요?

460만+ 법률 자료에서 관련 판례·법령·해석례를 찾아 답변합니다

AI 상담 시작
상법 제735조의3(단체보험) 조문의 해석상 문제점에 대한 소고 | 경영법률 2008 | AskLaw | 애스크로 AI