자동차보험 면책약관 규정에 대한 내용통제 및 급부조정의 법리에 관한 연구

Is it worth to have the insurance coverage for drunk driving or unlicensed driving?  Drunk driving or unlicensed driving is a significant crime.  Moreover, it is a major cause of a traffic accident as well as damage to your body. Korea has high number of accidents caused by of drunk drivers; therefore, it has high demand for strict regulations on drunk drivers since they have killed significant number of people. Since insurance coverage for drunk drivers may negatively impact on the need of strict regulations on drunk driving, the restrictions by the society is required. Unlike liability insurance which compensates damages to others, the need for drunk driver coverage for is not necessary.  Terms of reduction regarding drunk driving, driving without a license, or driving without a seat belt were made for the public interest. An insurance coverage could have neutral value; however, it should also consider the social benefit.  The Korea Supreme Court has interpreted the Article 633 Commercial Law broadly that their decisions were in contrast to common sense.  Therefore, those precedents should be corrected in soon time.  Unfortunately, it seems like the principles of the Korea Supreme Court will not likely to be changed soon.  Therefore, an approach with a theory of legislation will be more effective and that will be allowing exemption of violating major laws in Commercial Law.  Moreover, compulsory provisions in Commercial Law should be drafted separately and different, not comprehensive, considering policy holder protection and principles of insurance. Due to the court decision that the insurance clauses were void, it is highly likely that the supervisory authorities will expand the scope of relief, not considering statute of limitations for the protection of an insurance policyholder.  However, the fundamental principle of insurance management is that the insurer arrange the scale of insurance premiums based on the loss ratio occurred by applying exemption provisions of the insurance clauses, and pay insurance money, based on the balance of earning and expenditure.  Therefore, even if small amount of money from insurance may be paid due to the court’s decision, an insurer is not likely to be unjustly enriched immediately.  Additional payment of insurance will likely to be made due to the court’s decision and this will result in the increase of loss ratio.  In that case, it will ultimately increase the insurance policy holder’s insurance premiums that the court should make careful decision on this matter considering public interest of insurance system.  However, uniform corrective measures should be also established in order to prevent unnecessary disputes and ensure the balance between insurance policy holders when the court finds insurance clauses void.