본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기
국회도서관 홈으로 정보검색 소장정보 검색

목차보기

목차

생명보험계약에 있어서 피보험자의 자살에 관한 문제점 / 고택근 1

ABSTRACT 1

I. 문제의 제기 2

II. 자살의 의미 3

1. 자살할 의도 3

2. 의식 있는 자살과 의식 없는 자살 4

3. 판례에 나타난 의식 있는 자살의 기준 5

4. 고의의 입증 9

III. 일정기간이내의 자살에 대한 면책 11

1. 강행규정성 11

2. 기간이후의 고의에 의한 자살 13

3. 자살방지효과와 유족의 생활보호 13

IV. 효과 14

V. 제도의 개선방향 15

■참고문헌■ 16

1. 국내문헌 16

2. 외국문헌 17

초록보기

It is not meaningful to classify by legislation whether the suicide is conscious or unconscious according to the approach of the insurance contract. Consequently it can be ineffective if the revised act contains classification of suicide by concept which results in suicide by conscious or unconscious or mental illness. That is because suicide can be categorized theoretically, but in reality it is very difficult to detect on which category it falls.

Unconditional compensation for the suicide committed after 2 years of entering into a contract needs to be reconsidered. The value of secured living of the remained family can not precede that of protecting a life. Thus, the regulation to grant insurance compensation after 3 years of taking out insurance on one's life seems to be an unavoidable compromise if the insurance compensation has to be made for the suicide committed after a certain period of making a contract.

However, considering there is no compromise justified as far as life is concerned, as for the compensation for the suicide, a regulation to pay reimbursement of terminating the contract seems to be much better compromise than that of designating a certain period required for compensation. It may be an altenative to prevent a suicide if not a full compensation but a reimbursement of terminating the contract should be paid for securing the living of the remained family.