• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제18권
• /
• pp.137-157
• /
• 2002

The clauses of bill of lading(B/L) consist of the terms of contract for the carriage of goods by sea because of clauses of B/L by the mutual agreement of contracting parties. There are some exempted cause of deviation clause in B/L for specific reasons. Then deviation clauses are influenced by Rules of international carriage of goods by sea, because the international rules become the governing law of contract for the carriage of goods by sea. The problem of deviation clauses in B/L is stipulated as follows. "It shall be prerequisite to the Merchant' claim for damages on account of deviation that the merchant's insurance shall first have been cancelled on account of alleged deviation. No deviation shall oust the right to limit liability or damages, and the Carrier shall always be entitled to the full benefit of all privileges, rights and immunities contained in this Bill of Lading and incorporated tariffs." This stipulation should be adjusted according to the confirmed cases, otherwise it will be invalid according to the Hague Rules and Hamburg rules. The sphere of a reasonable deviation in the deviation clause should be interpreted in the connection with the designed voyage and the commercial object of contract for the carriage of goods by sea and the deviation become valid unless the policy, the general object of international rules or the true intention of contracting parties has violated.

• 한국항해학회지
• /
• 제15권3호
• /
• pp.35-51
• /
• 1991

The primary purpose of this study is to point out the rising problem from which the insured value is remarkably different from the sound value of the ship in the Institute Time Clauses-Hulls(1. 10. 83.) and that of the ship in the Marine Insurance Act, 1906. Its secondary purpose is to suggest remedial methods for these problems and to contribute to the reduction of premium for shipowners.

• 응용통계연구
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.247-263
• /
• 2000

자연재해(Natural Catastrophe)는 태풍, 홍수, 호우, 폭풍, 해일, 폭설, 가뭄, 지진 등과 같이 자연현상으로 인하여 발생하는 피해를 말한다. 자연재해는 한번 발생하면 엄청난 피해를 가져오므로 거대위험으로 분류된다. 현재 우리나라에서는 일반화재보험에서 풍수재위험과 지진위험을 담보하는 약관과 요율이 적용되고 있으나 이러한 풍수재담보와 지진담보에 대한 약관 및 요율은 외국에서 가져온 것(구득요율)이므로 우리나라 현실을 전혀 반영하지 못한 것이다. 이러한 연유로 보험계약자의 권익을 보호하기 위해 현재까지 우리나라 손해보험에서 사용하지 않은 통계적 방법을 이용하여 태풍과 풍수재에 대한 손해액 분포를 결정하고 그에 따른 적정보험료를 산출하였다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제47권
• /
• pp.337-353
• /
• 2010

On payment of the insurance money the insurer is entitled to be subrogated to all right and remedies of the assured in respect of the interest insured in so far as he has indemnified the insured. The purpose of subrogation is to prevent the assured from recovering more than once for the same loss, e.g. where goods are lost owing to a collision, the assured cannot claim the insurance money from the insurer and then sue the owners of the ship that negligently caused the collision. Under the doctrine of subrogation the right to sue owners of the negligent ship passes from the assured to the insurer on payment of the insurance money. The insurer is subrogated to the assured 'rights against the carrier under the contract of carriage. To defeat the cargo underwriters' subrogation righters, the carriers inserted in their B/L a clause allowing the carriers to have the "benefit of the shipper's insurance. But, in the Hague Rules, Hamburg Rules, Rotterdam Rules, its makes void any clause that assigns a benefit of insurance of the goods in favour of the carrier. In practice the insurer asks the assured to sign a letter of subrogation and retains the documents in order to prosecute the rights subrogated to him.

• 문화기술의 융합
• /
• 제10권3호
• /
• pp.667-673
• /
• 2024

본 연구는 건강보험의 본인부담상한제와 민영실손의료보험의 관계에서 야기되는 쟁점을 진단하고, 제도 개선을 위한 정책 과제를 제안하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 문헌연구를 통해 본인부담상한제 초과 환급금 미지급으로 인한 소비자 피해 실태와 건강보험 보장성 강화에 따른 실손보험의 역할 변화를 분석하였다. 연구 결과, 일방적 약관 해석과 불완전판매 관행이 소비자 권익을 침해하고 있으며, 실손보험의 보장 축소에도 불구하고 보험료 인하로 이어지지 않는 문제점이 확인되었다. 이에 상품 구조 합리화, 위험률 산출 투명화, 소비자 정보 제공 강화 등의 제도 개선과 함께, 건강보험과 민영보험의 합리적 역할분담을 위한 사회적 합의 도출이 시급함을 강조하였다. 본 연구는 의료보장체계의 발전적 재편을 위한 정책적 시사점을 제공한다는 점에서 의의가 있다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제43권
• /
• pp.239-273
• /
• 2009

Marine insurance contracts, which intended to provide indemnity against marine risks upon the payment of a premium, originated in Northern Italy in the late 12th and early 13th centuries. The law and practice of Italian merchants were later introduced into England through Lombard merchants. It is, therefore, quite exact that English and Continental marine insurance law have common root. Nevertheless, some significant divergences between English and Continental marine insurance systems occurred since the late 17th century, mainly due to different approaches adopted by English courts. The rule of warranty in English marine insurance was established in the second part of the 18th century by Lord Mansfield, who laid the foundations of the modern English law of marine insurance and developed different approaches, especially in the field of warranty in marine insurance law. Since the age of Lord Mansfield, English marine insurance law has developed a unique rule on warranty. Bearing in mind the realities of the 18th century, it could easily be understood why Lord Mansfield afforded such a strict legal character to marine warranties. At that time, the 'promise' given by the assured, played an important role for the insurer to assess the scope of the risk. Legal environments, however, have changed dramatically since the times of Lord Mansfield. Of course, it is still important that the assured keep his promises to the insurer under the insurance contract, which is based upon utmost good faith. Nevertheless, the remedy of automatic discharge from liability, regardless of existence of a casual link between the breach and loss seems harsh in the realities of the 21st century. After examining the warranty regime adopted by the German and Norwegian hull clauses, it is fair to say that they provide a more equitable approaches for the assured than does English law. Therefore, this article suggests that English warranty regime needs overall reform and it is time to reform.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제15권
• /
• pp.119-136
• /
• 2001

The purpose of this paper is to consider how to decide the cause of loss or damage to the transport goods when maritime accident occurs. In marine insurance, the underwriter is liable for any loss or damage proximately caused by a risk insured(MIA Art.55). So it is very important to determine the proximate cause of loss or damage to ascertain whether it is to be recoverable under the policy. But there is no definite conception or rule what is the proximate cause. It was left to the tribunal as a question of fact. In this paper, I will suggest the general rules to determine the proximate cause of loss or damage of the transport goods in marine insurance. First, in MIA 1906, there is the rule of proximate causation and it has been established the effective causation by cases since 1918. Second, in Institute Cargo Clauses(B) & (C), there are rules of considerably relaxed standards to determine the causation of loss of or damage using the "attributable to" and "caused by" basis. Third, it is noted, under the complex causation situation, there are difference basises to decide the liability of underwriters between the case of successive occurrence of single risk and the case of concurrent occurrence of several risks. Forth, in practice, it couldn't be ascertained the underwrier's liability by a definite rule and it should be fully considered the circumstances and conditions of the loss.

• 한국항해항만학회지
• /
• 제36권5호
• /
• pp.329-338
• /
• 2012

협회선박보험약관, 1/10/83은 선박의 항행구역을 제한하는 협회항로제한담보약관, 1/7/76을 첨부하여 오랜 기간 동안 광범위하게 사용되어 왔다. 선박 건조기술과 항해기술의 발달에 따라 협회선박보험약관은 수차례에 걸쳐 약관 내용을 수정 보완하면서 오늘날까지 사용되고 있는 점을 고려해 볼 때, 협회항로제한담보약관도 마땅히 수정 보완되었어야 했다. 더욱이, 선박보험의 피보험자는 이와 같은 해상사업의 환경변화에도 불구하고 항로제한담보구역을 부득이 항행 또는 기항해야 할 경우 과도한 추가보험료를 부담하고 있는 실정이다. 따라서 이 연구의 목적은 협회항로제한담보약관과 준용일본항로제한담보약관을 비교분석함과 동시에 기후변화, 선박구조, 항해, 통신 등의 제반 요건에 대한 현황을 고려하여, 협회항로제한담보약관을 면밀히 분석함은 물론 항로제한담보약관의 위반에 따른 추가보험료의 합리적인 수준을 제시함에 있다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제67권
• /
• pp.119-142
• /
• 2015

Many insurers have traditionally incorporated "fraud clauses" into insurance policies, setting out the consequences of making a fraudulent claim. Even in the absence of an express terms, English courts provide insurers with a remedy for a fraudulent claim. However, the law in this area is complex, convoluted and confused. English Law Commission think that the law in this area needs to be reformed for three reasons; (1) the disjunctive between the common law rule and section 17 generates unnecessary disputes and litigation, (2) increasingly, UK commercial law must be justified to an international insurance society, and (3) the rules on fraudulent claims are functioned as a deterrent if they are clear and well-understood. In order for these purposes, English Law Commission recommends a statutory regime to the effect that, when an insured commits fraud in relation to a claim, the insurer should (1) have no liability to pay the fraudulent claim and be able to recover any sums already paid in respect to the claim, and (2) have the option to treat the contract as having been terminated with from the time of the fraudulent act and, if chosen the option, be entitled to refuse all claims arising after the fraud, but (3) remain liable for legitimate losses before the fraudulent act. LC is not recommending a complete restatement of the law on insurance fraud generally. For example, LC does not seek to define fraud, instead, recommends the introduction of targeted provisions to confirm the remedies available to an insurer who discovers a fraud by a policyholder.

• 한국항해항만학회지
• /
• 제26권4호
• /
• pp.399-406
• /
• 2002

해상선박보험의 역사를 통하여 보면 많은 경우에, 피보험자의 상당주의의무의 결여로 인하여 보험자가 보상을 거부한 경우가 많은 것을 볼 수 있다. 또한 과거 우리나라의 해상사고를 보아도 대부분의 사고가 인적요인에 의해 발생하였음을 알 수 있다. 따라서 본 논문은 이러한 해상손해에 중점을 두고 보험약간과 다른 제반 규칙들을 고찰함으로써 상당주의의무의 필요성에 대해서 강조하며, 나아가 사고사례를 분석하여 상당주의의무의 이행과 그 효과에 대해서 고착하고자 한다.