未成年人死亡保險所生道德危險防範機制──兼評最高法院114年度台上字第1192號及歷審民事判決

Mechanism to Prevent Moral Hazard in Life Insurance for Minors

死亡保險之本旨，乃在分散風險，然涉及被保險人之生命，若未加審慎，反生道德危險之誘因。尤以未成年人為被保險人，恐危及幼弱生命，使不肖之徒趨利行險，是針對以未成年被保險人所締結的死亡保險契約，本文認為應將保險法第105條、第106條、第107條規定合併觀察，以共築道德危險防護牆，並著重「限額制約」、「強化同意」、「隨時撤銷」之觀點，探討如何於現行法下重新建構未成年人死亡保險所生道德危險之防範機制。亦即，就未滿十五歲未成年被保險人之死亡保險，應限縮其死亡給付金額僅能用於喪葬費支出，而稱為通常合理喪葬費用，超過通常合理喪葬費用即屬其餘死亡給付之約定，尚未生效，應待被保險人滿十五歲時自行獨立行使書面同意權，始生效力，以管控道德風險，禁止法定代理人代為同意或再為同意；縱為同意之撤銷，亦同，蓋此屬無損益中性行為。為有效發揮被保險人行使書面同意權之功能，本文主張應課與保險人向滿十五歲未成年被保險人負「充分說明與揭露風險義務」，使其得於行使書面同意權之前有足資評斷之依據。另於撤銷同意權之溯及適用問題上，本文除剖析臺灣臺北地方法院112年度保險字第89號、臺灣高等法院113年度保險上字第21號、最高法院114年度台上字第1192號民事判決之理由構成外，亦試行從憲法角度及增訂被保險人「撤銷同意權」之立法趣旨等，補充上開判決之論據基礎，以期能貫徹保障被保險人之權益、避免道德危險及尊重被保險人之人格權。

The fundamental purpose of death insurance lies in the dispersal of risk; however, as it involves the life of the insured, if prudence is not exercised, it may instead give rise to inducements of moral hazard. This is especially so where the insured is a minor, for it may endanger the fragile lives of the young and weak, causing unscrupulous persons to take risks in pursuit of profit. Therefore, with respect to death insurance contracts concluded on the lives of minors, this article considers that Articles 105, 106, and 107 of the Insurance Act should be jointly observed so as to build a defensive wall against moral hazard, with emphasis placed on the perspectives of“limitation of amount”,“strengthening of consent”, and“revocability at will”in order to examine how, under current law, the mechanisms for preventing moral hazard arising from death insurance on minors may be reconstructed. That is, for death insurance on insured minors under the age of fifteen, the amount of death benefit should be restricted solely to funeral expenses, referred to as ordinarily reasonable funeral expenses; any portion of death benefit exceeding ordinarily reasonable funeral expenses shall not yet take effect and shall require the insured minor, upon attaining the age of fifteen, to independently exercise the right of written consent before it becomes effective, in order to control moral hazard, with legal representatives prohibited from consenting or re-consenting on behalf of the minor. The same applies to the revocation of consent, for this constitutes an act neutral in effect, neither beneficial nor detrimental. For the insured’s right of written consent to be effectively exercised, this article maintains that insurers should bear the duty of adequate explanation and disclosure of risks to insured minors who have attained the age of fifteen, so as to provide them with sufficient grounds for assessment prior to the exercise of the right of written consent. With regard to the issue of retroactive application of the right of revocation, in addition to analyzing the reasoning in Taiwan Taipei District Court Civil Judgment 112 Insurance-Tzu No. 89, Taiwan High Court Civil Judgment 113 Insurance- Shang-Tzu No. 21, and Supreme Court Civil Judgment 114 Tai-Shang-Tzu No.1192, this article also attempts, from the constitutional perspective and the legislative purpose of adding the insured’s“right of revocation”to supplement the reasoning basis of the above judgments, with the aim of ensuring the protection of the rights of the insured, preventing moral hazard, and respecting the personality rights of the insured.