복수의 피보험자가 존재할 경우의 법리에 대한 고찰- 대법원 2012. 12. 13. 선고 2012다1177 판결에 대한 평석을 중심으로 -

There are several problems when the insured is not one person, but plural. The parents made complex insurance contract. The every day life-liability insurance was also included. The insured were the parents and son. The son has set a fire to a office building. The insurer has denied the payment of insurance money because of intent conduct of the insured. But the supreme court has seen that the insurer should pay the insurance amount covered. Although the son has set a fire, the parents should be protected as insured. The insured position should be decided individually per each insured. When father made automobile insurance contract, mother is also insured. Mother have had traffic accident. Because of this accident her son is dead. In this case the claim of the father does exist although he inherits his son's position. Mother is in that case attacker simultaneously. Therefore the portion of the mother becomes extinct because of confusion. When mother gives up the inheritance then father takes also her portion. In such a case father can get 100% claim against insurer. Furthermore when there are several beneficiary of insurance in life insurance one of them has killed the insured person. In this case, the another beneficiary should be protected in regard of receiving the insurance money. The another beneficiary should namely get the insurance amount. This content is not regulated in korean commercial law yet. The ministry of justice is now trying to regulate such a content in korean commercial code. The bill is now dealing with in korean national assembly.