보험약관의 해석원칙과 효력 - 자살재해사망특약을 중심으로 -

Recently, Korean Supreme Court Decision 2015da243347 Decided on May 12, 2016 delivered the judgment that the suicide is not the accident which means “the fortuitous and external physical injury”, but when the insured committed suicide after 2 years from the commencement of the insurer’s liability, exceptionally the insurer is liable for the sum insured, because the suicide should be considered as the insured event. In that case, the special accidental insurance policy provided that “this insurance covers the death or the fist class disability of the insured arising directly from the accident, but shall not cover when the insured commit suicide except for the insured injures himself in mental problems or commits suicide after 2 years from the commencement of the insurer’s liability”. In addition, Korean Supreme Court Decision 2016da218713, 2016da218720 Decided on September 30, 2016 held that the insurer is not liable for the sum insured, when the insured’s right extinguished for completion of the prescription(3 years). Many professors majoring in civil law, insurance law have unprecedently published the articles concerning the construction of the insurance contracts about those decisions. This study aims at comparatively researching American, English, French legal situations relating to the construction of the insurance contracts, reviewing Korean scholars’ opinion, and suggesting the writer’s opinion. The writer also reviews the effect of the insurance condition. The problem of special accidental suicide insurance has plainly revealed our retarded insurance practice. The author thinks that the major legal issues between the insurer and the insured have settled by two decisions. But special accidental suicide insurance issues have produced the future problems to insurance industry and supervisory authority as follows. Firstly, the insurers need to make their professional, fundamental ability concerning the producing of insurance products strong, and make an efforts to using ordinary and plain words in normal customers’ the perspective. Secondly, some insurers did not want to pay the insured money according to Korean Supreme Court Decision 2016da218713, 2016da218720 Decided on September 30, 2016 based on the prescription completion. But other insurers payed the money on the recommendation of Financial Supervisory Board. The writer thinks that Financial Supervisory Board and insurance industry must make an efforts to removing the differential treatment between insurers. Thirdly, Financial Supervisory Board need work cooperatively with the insurance industry in recovering the insurance consumers’ trust. Fourthly, this paper argues that the introduction of the group action system is necessary for removing the costly and time-consuming problems of insurance suit such as this special accidental suicide case.