애스크로AIPublic Preview
← 학술논문 검색
학술논문기업법연구2013.12 발행KCI 피인용 3

의료과실과 상해보험 보험사고-대법원 2010.8.19. 선고 2008다78491,78507 판결에 대한 평석을 중심으로-

Malpractice and accident definition of accidental insurance -focused on supreme court case 2008da78491,78507-

최병규(건국대학교)

27권 4호, 369~401쪽

초록

It is very important that the consumer has to get sufficient information from business provider. Nowadays the consumer contract, especially insurance contract is very complicated. Therefore it is not easy to understand the insurance contract concretely. Disputes are arising from the fact whether the insured can get insured sums or not. Insurance plays very important role in modern society. It takes strong social character and also character of public interest. Meanwhile, the technical development causes many accidents in modern society. Modern transport vehicles, for example train, airplane, car are very dangerous means of transportation. Whether a accident belong to insurance accident of accident insurance or not, is very difficult to answer. Generally, abruptness, contingency and exogenism are three core elements of accident insurance. But the definition of insurance accident is very difficult in accident insurance. The standard contract terms regulate that the insurer are not liable to surgical operation. When malpractice takes place, it is not easy to decide whether it belong to insurance accident of accidental insurance or not. The german insurance contract law(VVG) regulates that the factor contingency is presumed until the contrary evidences appear. We should adopt such a content in law. The author has criticized the supreme court decision(korean supreme court case 2008da78491,78507). The supreme court has decided that the accident can satisfy the contingency element. But he has seen that the accident belong to the indemnity contents. But the supreme court has decided in another case that the insurer should explain indemnity clauses. The author has in this study shown the recent reforms of german insurance law, especially that of accident insurance. The author has also tried to pick out some suggestions from german reform law contents. He has offered some suggestions for the right interpretation of the standard contract terms of accidental insurance. Whether a malpractice by the operation could happen or not, is not forseeable. Therefore such a accident should be regarded as a accident of accidental insurance.

Abstract

It is very important that the consumer has to get sufficient information from business provider. Nowadays the consumer contract, especially insurance contract is very complicated. Therefore it is not easy to understand the insurance contract concretely. Disputes are arising from the fact whether the insured can get insured sums or not. Insurance plays very important role in modern society. It takes strong social character and also character of public interest. Meanwhile, the technical development causes many accidents in modern society. Modern transport vehicles, for example train, airplane, car are very dangerous means of transportation. Whether a accident belong to insurance accident of accident insurance or not, is very difficult to answer. Generally, abruptness, contingency and exogenism are three core elements of accident insurance. But the definition of insurance accident is very difficult in accident insurance. The standard contract terms regulate that the insurer are not liable to surgical operation. When malpractice takes place, it is not easy to decide whether it belong to insurance accident of accidental insurance or not. The german insurance contract law(VVG) regulates that the factor contingency is presumed until the contrary evidences appear. We should adopt such a content in law. The author has criticized the supreme court decision(korean supreme court case 2008da78491,78507). The supreme court has decided that the accident can satisfy the contingency element. But he has seen that the accident belong to the indemnity contents. But the supreme court has decided in another case that the insurer should explain indemnity clauses. The author has in this study shown the recent reforms of german insurance law, especially that of accident insurance. The author has also tried to pick out some suggestions from german reform law contents. He has offered some suggestions for the right interpretation of the standard contract terms of accidental insurance. Whether a malpractice by the operation could happen or not, is not forseeable. Therefore such a accident should be regarded as a accident of accidental insurance.

발행기관:
한국기업법학회
분류:
법학

AI 법률 상담

이 논문의 주제에 대해 더 알고 싶으신가요?

460만+ 법률 자료에서 관련 판례·법령·해석례를 찾아 답변합니다

AI 상담 시작
의료과실과 상해보험 보험사고-대법원 2010.8.19. 선고 2008다78491,78507 판결에 대한 평석을 중심으로- | 기업법연구 2013 | AskLaw | 애스크로 AI