| 英文摘要 |
According to the traditional theory, the principle of indemnity exists in damage insurance, which is a mandatory law in nature, and the insurance subrogation is a subordinate system with general binding effect. Although the medical expense insurance is a type of life insurance, it is also applicable because it has the nature of compensation of damages. However, with the emergence of the rationed medical expenses insurance and even the actual payment and rationed payment selective medical expenses insurance, the view that the actual payment applies while the rationed payment does not is obviously unreasonable for the same economic payment. But the view that it is not applicable, especially in the case of two types of choice, where the type of actual payment deemed to be a fixed amount payment, is the result theory from the angle of justice, and lacks the legal basis. Based on the latest theories, the author thinks that it is reasonable to divide the principle of indemnity into the narrowest sense, the narrowest sense and the broadest sense. Therefore, the view that there is mandatory law and arbitrary law is the most reasonable one. Ordinary damages insurance must apply insurance subrogation, whereas medical expenses insurance should be dealt with by contractual agreement as there is little possibility of moral risk occurring and should be understood as not applicable in the absence of agreement. |
