보험법 개정에 부쳐

Concerning the Revision of Part Ⅳ(Insurance) Korean Commercial Act

Part Ⅳ(Insurance) Korean Commercial Act, enacted in 1962, was revised in 1991 with Part Ⅴ(Maritime Commerce), and I drafted the revised bill as member of Revision Committee. But, since the enforcement of the Revised Act, it is a pity that the court construes the revised provisions, for example, Article 638-3(Duty to Deliver and Explain the Policy Conditions), differently from the drafter's intentions. Therefore I think it necessary to re-revise the concerned articles definitely beyond dispute. Moreover, on the contrary of the court's judgements, I do emphasize as follows for the next revision of Part Ⅳ Korean Commercial Act. 1. In §638-3 it should be construed that policy conditions applies to insurance contract, unless the insured cancels the contract within one month from the contracting date, by reason of insurer's breach of the duty to deliver and explain the policy conditions. 2. In spite of the words of §650 Ⅱ, the forfeiture clause of Policy Conditions, which forfeits insurance contract unless the premium installments subsequent to the first one were paid during the days of grace, should be construed as valid. 3. It is unreasonable that the automobile liability insurance should cover the industrial accident, although the industrial accident is caused by the automobiles. According to Patterson's classification, in my view, the industrial accident is not an exceptions but an exclusions in the automobile liablity insurance. 4. In spite of the words of §732-2, the loss occurring while the insured is doing such felonies as drunken or unlicensed driving should be excluded from the personal accident insurance coverages.