自比較法視點解構並再建構保險經紀人之忠實義務 —以美國法及日本法為中心— - 政大學術集成

全文

(1)Department of Risk Management and Insurance. National Chengchi University Master Thesis. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. Deconstruct and Reconstruct Insurance Broker’s Fiduciary Duty from a Perspective of Comparative Law:. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. y. ‧. Focus on U.S. and Japan. i n C U h e n gHong Yu-Chi chi. v. Supervisor: Chi-Chou Yeh, Dr. iur. 109 3 Mar 2020. DOI:10.6814/NCCU202000616.

(2) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. DOI:10.6814/NCCU202000616.

(3) 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. 本論文を父と母に捧ぐ。. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. 心より感謝申し上げます。. y. ‧. 自由に生き方を選ばせていただいたことに、. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. DOI:10.6814/NCCU202000616.


(5) 致謝距離木柵那個暴雨驚心的論文口試午後已經又過了近三個月，這段時間雖稱不上跌宕起伏，但也足夠使我以不同的心情重新檢視了一次自己的論文了。開始執業後，更加明白學術研究裡的任性妄為，也深深意識到原來我在那樣的任性與自我中心裡獲得了一種至今無其他事物可比擬的，純粹美好的思索上的快樂。而這樣的快樂，有許多部分必須歸諸那些出現在我生命裡，甚至至今仍然守護著我的人們。謝謝我的指導教授——葉啟洲老師，如果不是大三時修習了您開設的保險法，我可能已經因為覺得念法律太無聊而轉系，更遑論進入風管所就讀，並以律師的身分留下來。是那個每週五上午的快樂時光，讓我喜歡上法律學術研究，讓我在常常感覺無所歸依的二十到二十一歲裡，尋獲了某種空間感，進而劃定了自己的領域。始終記得某個午後，我帶著很多很多的迷惘去到您的研究室，您告訴我，沒有任何一件事情會是白費，雖然在那些感覺白費的當下我們並無法理解那些發生在我們身上的事，但當那個時刻到來，我們就會明白。距離那個午後已經又過了幾年，我發現的確是這樣的，無論是在學術研究、職涯規劃甚至是人際關係中，我都曾在不同的時間點上以各式變體感受那些巨大的贖回。躲在彰化寫作論文的過程中，我最期待的事情就是每寫到一個段落後，北上找老師討論的過程。在小小的研究室裡，老師總是放下手邊的工作，聽我各種自成一個世界的推論過程，並且在我被自己困住時，提醒我還有很多逃跑的方法。謝謝老師總是溫柔慈藹地守護著叛逆又固執的我，花費寶貴的時間進入我多時動盪雜亂的冥想空間，梳理我的思緒，幫助我交出一本不妥協、不庸俗但某程度上又能貼著這個世界的軌跡前行的論文。您將豐富的視點與思想帶到我的生命裡，教會我嚴謹、認真與正直，對此我永遠感激。謝謝我的風管夥伴——品諭、學斌、江浩。謝謝你們時常跟我討論保險法，甚至連去吃麻辣鍋、燒烤還是 bar，我們都在討論保險法。人生中有幾個可以分享自己熱情的朋友，我感覺自己無比幸運。謝謝品諭從我們進入風管的第一天就給予難搞人如我諸多包容，能跟你一起修許多課、一起應屆上榜、一起做研究計畫，我感到非常幸福。謝謝學斌總是以誠懇、競競業業的心在對待學術研究，看著你就覺得還有人是真心愛保險法，進而感到一種安心。謝謝你多次開導在很多事情上仍然相當不成熟的我，忍受我個性上的尖刺與自我，在我的研究生生涯裡給予我無限的幫助。謝謝江浩，有你在的地方就有酒，有快速運轉的腦袋，有靈光，有美好的討論。謝謝你像照顧自己的妹妹一樣照顧我，並且總是跟我們腦力激盪。. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 謝謝一橋大學的石田剛老師，若沒有在一橋大學交換、參加石田ゼミ的經驗，這本論文不會有這麼豐富的日文資料，更遑論擁有以某種漂亮的體系將之加以呈現的可能性。謝謝社會學部的 Sonja Dale 老師，如果不是修了您開設的 Queer. DOI:10.6814/NCCU202000616.

(6) Theory，我不會開始研究哲學，而是因為閱讀了您推薦的 Sara Ahmed 著作《Queer Phenomenology》，我在這本論文裡使用了「指向（Orientation）」一詞，指涉軌跡、偏轉甚至質變。謝謝後藤さん、臨風，你們在我留日期間、感覺非常糟糕的時刻裡，讓我看到了一種真正的善良。謝謝你們幫助我度過比較法研究跟ゼミ發表。而同樣作為相信語言力量的人，是你們讓我在日本時不再那麼感覺孤單與無助。謝謝シウンさん，在我煩惱論文、無法閱讀日文文獻的時期，常常陪我吃飯，跟我聊東亞圈的歷史、政治、性別，以及我們相似與不相似的漂流感。謝謝仰觀、韵亭，多年以來，你們給予我無限的愛與包容，任憑我跟死小孩一樣鬧彆扭、撒嬌、哭夭。我做過很多回頭看只感到錯誤的決策，但唯有在選擇人生的夥伴這件事上我一次都沒有賭錯，一次都沒有。謝謝趙，我會記得那個四月你直播刷牙的聲音給我聽，記得你說我活在概念的世界裡太久了，記得那通從臺灣播到高松的電話。那麼短短幾瞬，我感覺自己被世界溫柔善待。謝謝你在我回國後，也花時間陪我聊其實已經離你有段時間的學術研究，聽我不停地說「怎麼辦我論文寫不完」。謝謝子恒，你說過這是一本集合我所有人生 issues 的論文，最後看起來是的，我寫到了忠實、信賴、適正意向形成，我在安全感、控制與權力及其指向間蒐集世界的隱喻。謝謝你給過我的所有精準譬喻與溫暖庇護，穿透. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. 所有因果關係，你是這本論文得以倖存的重要存在之一。謝謝まさひろさん，你是這趟旅程裡一個精緻完美的メタファー。謝謝芊汝，廚。一路以來、在所有意義上，你無數次將我從荒煙蔓草之地帶出來，並且不斷不斷地提醒我要走在自己的時間軸上，不要將他者的人生軌跡作為自己行動的依據。你一次都沒有放棄過我。寫作這本論文的過程中，我頻繁地改變我對信賴與忠實的看法——時而感覺強大，時而又無可避免地專注於脆弱，就這麼來回反覆——儘管有些抱歉，也許不夠完美，但這是二十五歲的我所能給出的，最好的答案。木柵、中野、池袋、小平、永和，謝謝你為我生命裡的所有陰暗與幽微帶來無限光亮。如果我因為願意保持正直與良善而收穫任何一點美好的事物，我願意將它全數獻給你。謝謝你。. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 最後，給不知何故打開這本論文的人們。這本論文帶給我最大的啟發是，如同穿越城市南端會有無雲的草原般，只要一直走我們就會走到寬闊柔軟的地方。以及，理論有其極限，實務有其不得不為的部分，所有事情都在變動，無法控制無法掌握——但對世界的無限想像與對思考的極致追求將使我們擁有更接近自由的可能。我十分期待被你推翻。. 洪鈺淇 2020 年 6 月 7 日暴雨的臺北. DOI:10.6814/NCCU202000616.

(7) 摘要我國保險法第 163 條第六項規定：「保險經紀人應以善良管理人之注意義務，為被保險人洽訂保險契約或提供相關服務，並負忠實義務。」惟自本條付之闕如的立法理由以觀，針對「保險經紀人是否為忠實義務人？」、「其所負忠實義務之內涵為何？」等問，仍多所不明。本文透過對美國法及日本法進行比較法研究，將保險經紀人之忠實義務解構如下：首先，保險經紀關係原則上非忠實關係，蓋依忠實權力理論，保險經紀人與保險消費者間原則上不存在「重要之實際利益之託付」，以及「就該託付自由行使裁量權限」。然而，若保險經紀關係中存在保險消費者將其有關締約、保單處理、續保及理賠等事項之自我決定權託付與保險經紀人之忠實指向，則例外地使保險經紀關係質變為忠實關係。其次，保險經紀人之忠實義務之內涵為：說明義務、諮詢建議義務・廣義之適合性義務，以及其他更廣泛之義務，此些義務均為保險經紀人基於保險經紀契約所負之契約義務，而忠實關係本即契約關係。於就保險經紀人之忠實義務加以解構後，本文提出二種於契約法上再建構保險經紀人忠實義務之方法：①以誠實信用原則擴張保險經紀人基於保險經紀關係所負之義務（忠實的保險經紀契約）。②將忠實關係直接認定為獨立於原保險經紀關係之契約關係（獨立之忠實・委任契約）。前者於義務認定上較為緩和，但也因此蒙受較多之論理限制；後者則雖呈現相對激進之態勢，惟蘊藏了解釋適用上的自由。於解構／再建構保險經紀人之忠實義務後，本文亦分別從立法面、監理規制面以及司法實務面提出若干建議。就立法面而言，本文認為未來立法應朝向將「忠實義務」之法律標籤予以撕去的方向努力，並應於承認保經代趨同現象存在之前提下，重新檢討過往之立法邏輯。於監理規制面，本文認為應以保險經紀人之說明義務為中心，建構完備之資訊提供規制；至若諮詢建議義務及意向理解義務，則可暫不考慮。而就司法實務而言，除應細緻劃定保險經紀人民事法上義務之範圍外，亦可參酌本文就忠實指向所為之研究，填充誠實信用原則或將之作為認定契約關係之基礎。最後，回歸保險法第 163 條第六項至第八項之解釋論，本文認為第六項「忠實義務」之規定至多僅反映出立法者目前對保險經紀人之規制態度；第七項「書面分析報告」之規定，為保險經紀人之忠實義務於監理法上之體現；第八項「報酬揭露義務」所要求揭露者非保險經紀人由保險人處所收受之佣金，與忠實義務之內涵無涉。. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 關鍵詞：保險經紀人、忠實義務、注意義務、忠誠義務、忠實權力理論、忠實指向、諮詢建議義務、適合性義務、意向理解義務. DOI:10.6814/NCCU202000616.


(9) Abstract According to paragraph 6, article 163 of the Insurance Act, insurance brokers owe fiduciary duty and shall negotiate for the insurance contract on behalf of the insured or provide related services to the insured. However, the underlying rationale of the foregoing regulation is not addressed in the legislative explanation of the Insurance Act. This thesis aims to deconstruct insurance brokers’ fiduciary duty from the perspective of comparative law, particularly focused on U.S. and Japanese law, and accordingly reconstruct insurance brokers’ duty under Taiwan’s legal system. Firstly, for the purposes of deconstruction, this thesis will adopt the Fiduciary Power Theory as its theoretical basis. Due to the lack of “the entrustment of material practical interests” and “exercising such entrustment with discretionary power”— which is considered the key factor in establishing a fiduciary relationship according to Fiduciary Power Theory—this thesis finds that the relationship between an insurance broker and an insurance consumer is not intrinsically a fiduciary one. However, if the. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. insurance consumer entrusts his decision-making regarding insurance application, policy management, policy renewal, and claims—which is described as “Fiduciary Orientations” in this thesis—then the insurance broker-insurance consumer relationship will become a fiduciary one. Secondly, the substantial connotation of insurance brokers’ fiduciary duty includes the duty of disclosure, duty to advise/duty of suitability (in its wide definition), and other broader duties. The above duties are all insurance brokers’ contractual duties based on an insurance brokerage contract; therefore, a fiduciary relationship is a contractual relationship.. er. io. sit. y. Nat. After deconstructing insurance brokers’ fiduciary duty, this thesis suggests two possible methods to reconstruct such fiduciary duty on the basis of contract law: (i) broaden insurance brokers’ duty based on an insurance brokerage contract by exercising the principle of good faith (i.e., a fiduciary insurance brokerage contract) and (ii) directly deem the insurance broker-insurance consumer relationship as an independent contractual relationship (i.e., independent fiduciary/mandate contract). The former is comparatively moderate in the determination of the scope of insurance brokers’ duty; however, this subjects it to more theoretical restrictions. The latter, although seemingly more radical, enables a certain degree of freedom of legal interpretation and application. In addition to deconstructing and reconstructing insurance brokers’ fiduciary duty, this thesis offers some suggestions for legislation, supervision, and judicial practice. As far as the legislative aspect is concerned, this thesis argues that the legal label of “fiduciary duty” should be removed, and an obvious convergence of the role of insurance broker and insurance agent should be recognized. As such, legislators should reconsider the past logic adopted in law promulgation regarding insurance brokers’ duty.. n. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. DOI:10.6814/NCCU202000616.

(10) In terms of supervision, this thesis believes that insurance brokers’ duty of disclosure should be taken as the main consideration to establish a complete system of regulation to secure that the insurance consumer has access to relevant information. Regarding the duty to understand insurance consumers’ intentions, this thesis suggests that the introduction of such duty to Taiwan’s insurance regulation system should be held off, at least for now. In terms of judicial practice, this thesis believes that the courts should determine the scope of insurance brokers’ duty under civil law using a more sophisticated rationale. Moreover, the courts could also take account of the thesis’s research findings regarding Fiduciary Orientation while fulfilling the connotation of the principle of good faith and determining whether a fiduciary relationship actually exists. Finally, by returning to the interpretation of paragraphs 6, 7, and 8, article 163 of the Insurance Act, this thesis concludes that the “Duty of Loyalty” stipulated in paragraph 6 only reflects legislators’ current regulatory attitude towards insurance brokers; that the “written analysis report” addressed in paragraph 7 is an embodiment of insurance brokers’ fiduciary duty in regulatory law; and that insurance brokers’ duty. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. to disclose any remuneration received from insurance consumers instead of commissions received from insurers, which is promulgated in paragraph 8, is entirely unrelated to the connotation of insurance brokers’ fiduciary duty.. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. Keywords: Insurance Broker, Fiduciary Duty, Duty of Care, Duty of Loyalty, Fiduciary Power Theory, Fiduciary Orientations, Duty to Advise, Duty of Suitability, Duty to Understand the Intention. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. DOI:10.6814/NCCU202000616.

(11) 簡目第一章. 緒論 ··················································································· 1. 第一節研究動機與問題意識 ···································································· 1 第一項研究動機 ·························································································· 1 第二項問題意識 ·························································································· 2. 第二節名詞翻譯擇定 ············································································· 3 第一項法律名詞翻譯之基本原則 ····································································· 3 第二項「Fiduciary Duty」作為「忠實義務」 ······················································ 4 第三項「誠実義務」作為「誠實義務」 ···························································· 6. 政治大文獻回顧 ·························································································· 7 立. 第三節文獻回顧與研究方法 ···································································· 7 第一項. 第二項研究方法 ························································································· 11. ‧ 國. 學. 第四節章節架構 ················································································· 12. 我國保險經紀人之地位 ························································· 14. ‧. 第二章. sit. y. Nat. 第一節概說 ······················································································· 14 第二節保險經紀人之法律地位 ······························································· 15. io. er. 第一項保險經紀人與要保人之關係 ································································· 15. al. n. iv n C hengchi U 小結 ······························································································· 36. 第二項保險經紀人與保險人之關係 ································································· 27 第三項. 第三節保險經紀人之法律上義務 ···························································· 36 第一項民事法上之義務 ················································································ 36 第二項保險監理法上之義務 ·········································································· 58 第三項小結 ······························································································· 61. 第四節我國相關案例 ··········································································· 62 第一項與未媒介最合適保險商品有關之案例 ····················································· 62 第二項與續保有關之案例 ············································································· 68 第三項與保單管理有關之案例 ······································································· 72 第四項考察 ······························································································· 76. 第五節本章小結 ················································································· 77. i. DOI:10.6814/NCCU202000616.

(12) 第三章. 忠實義務之基本理論 ···························································· 78. 第一節概說 ······················································································· 78 第二節忠實關係之成立 ········································································ 78 第一項忠實關係可否被定義 ·········································································· 78 第二項忠實關係之定義 ················································································ 80 第三項課予忠實義務之必要性 ······································································· 85 第四項典型之忠實關係態樣 ·········································································· 86. 第三節忠實義務之內涵 ········································································ 94 第一項概說 ······························································································· 94 第二項義務範圍 ························································································· 95 第三項體系定位 ························································································· 96. 政治大. 第四節我國法下之「忠實義務」 ··························································· 109. 立. 第一項信託法制上之「忠實義務」 ······························································· 110. ‧ 國. 學. 第二項公司法上之「忠實義務」 ·································································· 113 第三項證券投資信託及顧問法下之「忠實義務」 ············································· 118 第四項金融消費者保護法上之「忠實義務」 ··················································· 120. ‧. 第五項保險法下之「忠實義務」 ·································································· 123. sit. y. Nat. 第六項我國法制之「忠實義務」之整體觀察 ··················································· 126. al. 比較法上關於保險經紀人忠實義務之辯論 ································ 131. iv n C 概說 ······················································································ 131 hengchi U n. 第一節. io. 第四章. er. 第五節本章小結 ················································································ 129. 第二節美國 ······················································································ 132 第一項美國保險招攬制度之概觀 ·································································· 132 第二項美國保險經紀人之法律地位 ······························································· 135 第三項美國保險經紀人對被保險人之法律責任 ················································ 138 第四項美國法之觀察 ················································································· 180. 第三節日本 ······················································································ 181 第一項日本保險招攬制度之概觀 ·································································· 181 第二項日本保險經紀人之法律地位 ······························································· 191 第三項日本保險經紀人之誠實義務 ······························································· 198 第四項日本法之觀察 ················································································· 255. 第四節本章小結 ················································································ 257. ii. DOI:10.6814/NCCU202000616.

(13) 第五章. 解構／再建構我國保險經紀人之忠實義務 ································ 259. 第一節概說 ······················································································ 259 第二節我國保險經紀人之忠實義務構造 ·················································· 259 第一項檢驗保險經紀人是否為忠實義務人 ······················································ 259 第二項保險經紀關係中之忠實指向 ······························································· 266 第三項小結 ····························································································· 273. 第三節再建構我國保險經紀人之忠實義務 ··············································· 273 第一項自解釋論建構 ················································································· 273 第二項自立法論建構 ················································································· 294 第三項小結 ····························································································· 304. 第四節本章小結 ················································································ 305. 第六章. 政治大. 結論與建議 ······································································· 306. 立. 第一節結論 ······················································································ 306. ‧ 國. 學. 第一項解釋保險法中之忠實義務 ·································································· 306 第二項解構保險經紀人之忠實義務 ······························································· 306. ‧. 第三項再建構保險經紀人之忠實義務 ···························································· 308. y. Nat. 第二節建議 ······················································································ 309. sit. 第一項立法面 ·························································································· 309. n. al. er. io. 第二項監理規制面 ···················································································· 310. i Un. v. 第三項司法實務面 ···················································································· 310. Ch. engchi. 參考文獻 ······················································································ 311 本文重要案例對照表 ······································································· 322. iii. DOI:10.6814/NCCU202000616.
