我國保險法據實說明義務之研究 -以被保險人於訴訟中之地位為中心

Abstract

我國《保險法》第64條自西元1929年制定至今，僅經歷五次小幅度之修正。然而當初保險法制定之時空背景，與現今高度發展之社會相比，已有顯著之差異，因此該條規定運用於保險實務時，往往會產生高度的爭議性。我國學者就該條文適用之弊病，已討論多時，且提出相當多寶貴的修正建議。本論文嘗試針對我國2005年至2015年間最高法院、高等法院及其分院民事判決之判斷方式進行分析比較，回應我國學說長期以來對該條文規定之疑慮與爭議，並進一步探討被保險人於訴訟中之地位如何？如被保險人於訴訟中處於相對弱勢之地位，該情形能否透過現行法之修正予以改善？此外，本論文亦將透過實證研究及法律經濟分析之方法，檢視現行法條之適用情形及其不足之處。期許透過前述研究方法，能提供保險法據實說明義務之研究另一種視角，並於文末提出一個最有效益且同時兼顧被保險人保護與保險業運行維護之立法模式，在被保險人保護與保險機制運行間取得平衡。即使在現實世界中，交易成本無法完全消除，本論文仍嘗試透過公平有效率之成本分配，盡可能從根本上減低保險契約雙方在締約時之成本，使保險契約之效益極大化且符合現今社會對於保險機制之需求與期待，以期能提升社會大眾福祉。

The regulation of the misrepresentation (Section 64) in Insurance Law in Taiwan had been modified for only five times since 1929. However, during the past 80 years, the background of the society and the relationship between the insurer and the insured has been changed rapidly. Therefore, it’s time to rethink that whether the regulation is still suitable today? There’s lots of article discussing on these topics, including whether the law overcompensates the insurer? Whether the law can provide the insured enough incentive to avoid making a misrepresentation? This article will emphasis on the issues above and focus on the status of the insured in litigation. Besides, this article aim to provide a role model for legislators: a regulation which could provide the insured enough protection, in the meanwhile, avoid hurting the insurer‘s business judgement decision. Last but not least, this article will try to deal with the issues above with empirical methods as well as law and economic analyst. Although transaction cost might not be totally eliminated, we still can find a way which is relatively efficient and fair. Besides, this way could meet the requirement and expectation of the society as well.