이 논문에서 논하고자 하는 보험모집인의 고지 및 통지수령권에 관한 문제는 보험계약법 분야에서는 뜨거운 감자라고 할 정도로 깊이 있게 논하거나 격렬하게 다투지 아니한 채 종래의 이론과 판례의 입장을 크게 비판하지 않고 지금에 이르렀다고 해도 과언이 아니다, 그 이유는 크게 두 가지로 요약할 수 있다. 하나는 보험계약의 체결대리권을 가지고 있지 않다는 점이며, 또 하나는 만일 보험모집인에게 고지·통지수령권을 인정한다면 현재의 보험모집인의 전문지식 등 지적수준이나 법적 지위에서 오는 경제적 불안정성에 따른 탈법행위의 우려 등이라고 할 수 있다. 그러나 신 금융질서체제의 구축과 함께 금융소비자 보호가 그동안의 공공적 성격이라는 금융 산업의 보호보다 그 가치가 크지 않다는 인식 하에 이제는 보험소비자보호의 관점에서 이 문제를 다루어야 한다고 생각한다,. 특히 보험계약자와 보험모집인간의 긴밀한 관계 즉 보험계약의 체결 시부터 동 계약기간의 종료에 이르는 기간동안 양 당사자는 가장 가깝게 가장 빈번하게 교통하고 있다는 오늘날의 보험업계의 실정을 고려한다면 보험모집인에게 계약체결의 대리권과는 별개로 고지·통지수령권을 인정하는 것이 타당하다고 본다. 그 구체적인 방법으로서 보험업법 제2조 9호의 규정을 개정하고, 그 후속조치로서 이미 작년에 신설된 보험모집에 종사하는 자의 설명의무와 그 위무위반의 경우의 벌칙규정(보험업법 제209조 제3항 제7호)에 대한 개선이 필요하다.

Point at issue of this treatise can say that is hot potato in field of insurance law as problem about insurance salesmen's competence. Therefore, argue as is deeply about this problem so far or did not criticize greatly past theory and precedent without squabbling vigorously. The reason can summarize by greatly two. One is that do not have right of representation to contract insurance contract. If consider present insurance salesmen's expert knowledge and intelligent level and legal position if recognize this competence to insurance salesmen another, because illegality etc.. are alarmed. But, new banking system is thought that must be thought, and deal with this problem in vantage point of consumer's protection now that consumer's protection is not big value than public's protection. Specially, inseverable relation between insurance contractor and insurance salesmen, indeed, person concerned thinks that thing which recognize this competence separately with right of representation for conclusion of insurance contract to insurance salesmen if consider personal feelings that is communicating most nearly and frequently is right from conclusion of insurance contract to end of contract period. I think that must revise insurance business law article 2-9 by the specific method, and penal regulations of case that violate duty of insurance salesmen's comment and the duty that prescribe newly at last year as action that is the succession.

Point at issue of this treatise can say that is hot potato in field of insurance law as problem about insurance salesmen's competence. Therefore, argue as is deeply about this problem so far or did not criticize greatly past theory and precedent without squabbling vigorously. The reason can summarize by greatly two. One is that do not have right of representation to contract insurance contract. If consider present insurance salesmen's expert knowledge and intelligent level and legal position if recognize this competence to insurance salesmen another, because illegality etc.. are alarmed. But, new banking system is thought that must be thought, and deal with this problem in vantage point of consumer's protection now that consumer's protection is not big value than public's protection. Specially, inseverable relation between insurance contractor and insurance salesmen, indeed, person concerned thinks that thing which recognize this competence separately with right of representation for conclusion of insurance contract to insurance salesmen if consider personal feelings that is communicating most nearly and frequently is right from conclusion of insurance contract to end of contract period. I think that must revise insurance business law article 2-9 by the specific method, and penal regulations of case that violate duty of insurance salesmen's comment and the duty that prescribe newly at last year as action that is the succession.

, , , , , ,

insurance salesmen, duty of disclosure, notice duty, right to receive notice receipt, insurance consumer, insurance industry