채권자의 압류제한 입법을 통한 보험수익자의 보호
Protect the Beneficiary from Creditors by Exemption Law
김선정(동국대학교)
23권 4호, 309~342쪽
초록
In 2007, the Ministry of Justice(MOJ) proposed newly introduced exemption clause in the Commercial Act Ⅳ(Insurance). According to amendment bill art.2of732(Prohibition of seizure to insurance claims), the debtor was banned for a seizer of death benefit to the amount equivalent to one half of the death benefit. Exemption clause was legislated already in various Korean laws, e.g. Civil Execution Act §246 sec.7., Postal Savings and Insurance Act §§. 30 and 45. etc. Such laws originated from U.S. In many states, courts at common law often kept insurance proceeds payable to an insured's widow or dependent children beyond the reach of creditors, even in the absence of any statute, so the beneficiaries would not become wards of the state. For most states in U.S, enacted exemption clause. But every state and the District of Columbia have differing statutes concerning the exemption of insurance proceeds. In some states provide in Insurance act and other states in Civil procedure act or Bankruptcy act. New York Insurance law and California Civil procedure act are typical legislation. An overview of life insurance exemption law indicates that many states don't limit the amount of life insurance that is exempt, but some states limited definitive amount e.g. $300. because life insurance is more often being used by the wealthy and financially sophisticated for estate planning far beyond the care and support of their dependants. But art.2 of 732 of bill prohibit to seizer for the 50% rate of the death benefit regardless of the size of the amount of insurance sums. Art.2 of 732 was criticized that this clause infringement of the rights of creditors overly and resulted the rich-get-richer and the poor-get-poorer under the sacrifice of the creditor. In Feb. 5. 2013, The MOJ resubmit the amendment bill of Insurance act and the prohibition clause(art.2 of 732) was eliminated in the recent bill. The writer emphasize that the definitive amount limitation model as New york state Insurance law is better then rate limitation model, If the exemption clause was enacted in the future.
Abstract
In 2007, the Ministry of Justice(MOJ) proposed newly introduced exemption clause in the Commercial Act Ⅳ(Insurance). According to amendment bill art.2of732(Prohibition of seizure to insurance claims), the debtor was banned for a seizer of death benefit to the amount equivalent to one half of the death benefit. Exemption clause was legislated already in various Korean laws, e.g. Civil Execution Act §246 sec.7., Postal Savings and Insurance Act §§. 30 and 45. etc. Such laws originated from U.S. In many states, courts at common law often kept insurance proceeds payable to an insured's widow or dependent children beyond the reach of creditors, even in the absence of any statute, so the beneficiaries would not become wards of the state. For most states in U.S, enacted exemption clause. But every state and the District of Columbia have differing statutes concerning the exemption of insurance proceeds. In some states provide in Insurance act and other states in Civil procedure act or Bankruptcy act. New York Insurance law and California Civil procedure act are typical legislation. An overview of life insurance exemption law indicates that many states don't limit the amount of life insurance that is exempt, but some states limited definitive amount e.g. $300. because life insurance is more often being used by the wealthy and financially sophisticated for estate planning far beyond the care and support of their dependants. But art.2 of 732 of bill prohibit to seizer for the 50% rate of the death benefit regardless of the size of the amount of insurance sums. Art.2 of 732 was criticized that this clause infringement of the rights of creditors overly and resulted the rich-get-richer and the poor-get-poorer under the sacrifice of the creditor. In Feb. 5. 2013, The MOJ resubmit the amendment bill of Insurance act and the prohibition clause(art.2 of 732) was eliminated in the recent bill. The writer emphasize that the definitive amount limitation model as New york state Insurance law is better then rate limitation model, If the exemption clause was enacted in the future.
- 발행기관:
- 한국경영법률학회
- 분류:
- 법학