告知義務違反要件으로서의 重過失 [대상판결: 대법원 2013. 6. 13 선고2011다54631, 4648 판결]

This paper is to study and analyze some important cases held by therecent Korean Supreme Court. The issue which will be dealt with in this paperinvolves the duty of disclosure. Where a consumer insurers another person'slife, is it duty of consumer that investigate the person whose life is insuredabout their health? The Supreme Court construed the related matters, and thispaper clarified the holding. The section 651 of Korean Commercial Code isbased on utmost good faith, and it has been interpreted to mean that a insuredis under a duty volunteer material information, and that the penalty for failing todo so is avoidance. It places an obligation on the insured to disclose everycircumstance which would influence the judgement of a prudent insurer in fixingthe premium or determining whether he will take the risk. This paper tries toclarify the meaning of intention and gross negligence. It is now generallyaccepted good practice that insurers should ask insureds questions about anymaterial facts they wish to know. Where a consumer takes out insurance onanother person's life, the insurer should ask the person whose life is beinginsured. In this case the insurer may not rely on the information provided bythe consumer. The consumer would not owe a duty to investigate the state of another person's health. The result is that where a consumer takes outinsurance on another person's life, both the consumer and the life insured areunder a duty to take reasonable care not to make a misrepresentation.