냉동창고건물의 잔여공사와 고지의무위반 － 대법원 2012.11.29. 선고 2010다38663, 38670 판결에 대한 평석을 중심으로 － = Remained extension work on a cold storage and violation of duty of disclosure - focused on the critical notes about the Korean Supreme Court case 2010Da38663, 38670 -

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Insurance plays very important role in modern society. It takes strong social character and also character of public interest. In recent days a important case has appeared in regard of the public function of the private insurance. Because of unknown fire a cold storage was burn totally. Almost 40 persons have died or injured because of this incident. The insurer has denied the insurance protection because of the violation of the duty of disclosure. There were extension works in the mentioned cold storage. The key point is wether the insured has violated the duty of disclosure in regard of this extension works. The 1st and 2en instances have denied the violation of the duty disclosure of the insured. But the supreme court has accepted the argument of the insurer that the insured has violated the duty of disclosure on the ground of gross negligence. But this decision is a seriously wrong judgment. The reform of the duty of disclosure is the key point of the german(2007) and japanese(2008) insurance contract law reform. This study concentrates on analysing the supreme court case(2010Da38663, 38670). The author has criticized the supreme court decision. he has also shown the recent reforms of german and japanese law. The author has also tried to pick out some suggestions from german reform as not only 'de lege ferenda' but also as a interpretation way of the existing law, especially in regard of duty of disclosure. We should also understand the duty of disclosure as a passive answer system. The insurance practice has already shown that the duty of disclosure means the duty of passive answer. The supreme court in korea(96Da27971) has already confirmed this point.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김형기, "일본 보험법의 주요 개정내용" (482) : 2009

2 맹수석, "일본 개정 보험법의 주요 내용" (360) : 2009

3 정찬형, "상법강의(하)(제14판)" 박영사 2012

4 박기억, "상법(보험편) 개정안에 대한 의견" 2009

5 김성태, "보험법강론" 법문사 2001

6 장덕조, "보험법 판례연구집" 법영사 2010

7 박세민, "보험법" 박영사 2011

8 양승규, "보험법" 삼지원 2004

9 한창희, "보험법" 국민대학교 출판부 2011

10 최기원, "보험법" 박영사 2002

11 장덕조, "보험법" 법문사 2011

12 보험경영연구회, "보험론" 문영사 2005

13 이기수, "보험․해상법" 박영사 2008

14 한기정, "고지의무의 수동화 - 자발적 고지의무에서 수동적 응답의무로 -" 한국비교사법학회 16 (16): 325-363, 2009

15 Römer, "Versicherungsvertragsgesetz"

16 Rüffer, "Nomos"

17 Terbille, "Münchener Anwalts Handbuch Versicherungsrecht" München 2008

18 장덕조, "2009년도 보험법 판례의 동향과 그 연구" 한국상사판례학회 23 (23): 397-441, 2010