본문 바로가기
  • Home

A study about conditions analysis on the scope of the driving insured in voluntary automobile insurance standard policy conditions

  • DONG-A LAW REVIEW
  • 2014, (63), pp.159-192
  • Publisher : The Institute for Legal Studies Dong-A University
  • Research Area : Social Science > Law

Cho, Gyu Seong 1

1협성대학교

Accredited

ABSTRACT

Voluntary automobile insurance standard policy conditions are composed of five types of insured, namely in addition to ‘the named insured’ indicated in the policy the following persons are insureds: ‘the spouse (including unregistered spouse) and relatives of the named insured’, ‘the permitting insured’(namely, any person who drives or uses the automobile with the permission of the named insured) and ‘the employer of the named insured’, and ‘the driving insured’(namely, any person who drives for the above mentioned each insureds)Court rulings and claim adjuster’s affair have caused confusion because of the interpretation on the scope of the driving insured is different. In order to resolve these issues, I think that analysis on the scope of the driving insured in automobile insurance policy conditions must comply with the purpose of introduction and the origin of terms and conditions. According to the existing the Supreme Court’s judgement, if the driver is employed, without permission of owner or not, he became the driving insured. But I think that the existing the Supreme Court’s judgement is wrong. Because even though a person is the employed driver, if he drives for his own interests, he is not the driving insured but automobile operator(=means a person who operates an automobile for himself) by Act on Guarantee of Compensation for Loss caused by Automobile. Fortunately, in recent years, the pertinent Supreme Court’s judgement which the interpretation about the scope of the driving insured exactly determines has been sentenced. According to this Supreme Court case, even though a driver would have been driving for the permitting insured, if his driving is against the named insured’ apparent permission, he is not the driving insured. In conclusion, I strongly support this Supreme court case, because the judgement can make it clear the implication and extent on the scope of the driving insured under the automobile insurance clauses. Also I propose a revision of the provisions in order to eliminate any dispute relating to the interpretation of terms and conditions.

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.