IFRS 17과 Solvency Ⅱ의 비교·분석을 통한 보험사의 재무건전성 감독기준에 관한 설문조사연구

International Accounting Standards Board(IASB) finally announced the new standard of IFRS 17, with the goal of establishing coherent accounting practice for insurance contract. The main content of IFRS 17 is changing the evaluation method of insurance debt from the cost method to the market value method. This study analyzed the effect of adopting IFRS17 to domestic insurance companies, and based on the comparison of IFRS17 and Solvency Ⅱ, conducted a survey on the topic of appropriate insurance supervision standard in regard to adopting IFRS 17. As for the implementation method of adopting IFRS 17, delaying the introduction beyond 2022, implementing it for all insurance companies and allowing early implementation received the most support. Also, the system development and preparedness level of professional personnel in regard to adopting IFRS 17 were important determinants for the timing of implementation. The amount of support was the lowest for delaying the implementation for the capital expansion due to capital impairment resulting from adoting IFRS 17. Also, the expert groups' survey results in regard to appropriate supervision standards when aodpting IFRS 17 are as follows. ① When calculating insurance debt, the expert group supports the method of calculating the future cash flow for different coverage risks like Solvency Ⅱ, which is more elaborate compared to the unit of insurance contract for IFRS 17. ② In regard to the estimation standard for the risk－free rate of return, among discount rates for evaluating insurance debt, the treasury bond interest rate suggested by IFRS 17 received overwhelming support compared to the interest swap rate of Solvency Ⅱ. ③ In regard to the risk adjustment estimation, the method of setting the risks related to insurance product contracts only like in IFRS 17 was favored compared to Solvency Ⅱ. ④ The expert group prefers the supervision standard that matches the accounting standard, in regard to evaluating assets(amortized cost, tangible asset, investment property) and contingent liabilities. ⑤ The expert group from the academic world and accounting firms were negative on average in regard to the method of phased discounted rate reduction, which was suggested by the insurance supervisory authority in order to prevent and minimize the effect of implementing the market value method of insurance debt on the insurance companies. In this survey, the academic world and accounting firms, which are typical groups that can make neutral decisions, did not show significant differences in their reponses, and this supports the objectivity of the survey results. The survey that targets such neutral expert groups will contribute to closing the gap in opinion between the insurance supervisory authority and insurance industry in regard to the implementation timing and method of IFRS 17, and preparing appropriate supervision standards that can alleviate the burdens of domestic insurance companies and allow for soft landing of IFRS 17. This study is expected to further invigorate future researches on related supervision standards, in addition to IFRS 17 studies.