人身保险合同存续期间保单现金价值的执行问题研究

发布时间：2018-06-19 04:03

本文选题：人身保险合同 + 现金价值　；参考：《华东政法大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：自1995年我国首部《保险法》颁布并实施以来,我国保险业进入了快速发展的20年,保险业随着中国加入WTO实现对外开放,保险公司竞争日益激烈,投保人的投保意识也不断增强。在这样的大背景下,探索如何引导保险法律关系与其它部门法律关系的协调发展尤为重要,其中一个比较突出的问题便是保险合同法律关系与债权债务关系的优先权问题,放在目前的司法环境中,即为:能否为解决债权债务纠纷而解除保险合同关系的问题。围绕这一问题,司法活动陷入了两难的困境,在债务人无其它财产可供执行的情况下,如果认为债权人的利益应当得到保障,执行债务人持有保单的现金价值,则意味着保险合同法律关系让位于债权债务关系;如果认为保单现金价值并非为作为债务人的投保人所有,或认为由于保险合同合法存续法院无权强制执行,则意味着债权债务关系让位于保险合同法律关系。观点不一导致司法裁判结果的不一致性,损害了一部分权利人权益的同时,司法的公信力也受到质疑。本文将在剖析保单现金价值的性质与归属基础上,结合案例与国外法律状况,探索完善我国关于人身保险合同存续期间保单现金价值执行的立法。本文主要内容为以下四章:第一章通过案例引出司法活动中现实存在的问题:对保单的现金价值能否执行的问题认识不一致,导致司法裁判的不一致。在个案中法官手中的自由裁量权并非有助于实现正义,而导致了潜在的司法不公,出于维护债权人利益、法律权威、保险人利益的需要,提出本文中将主要讨论的保单现金价值相关问题。第二章从保单现金价值的界定与来源入手,分析从投保人所缴纳的保费到保单的现金价值转化原因与过程。从债权说与期待权说、保险费与保单现金价值的比较中,得出具有现金价值的保单应该属于有价证券形式的债权的观点,解决了保单的现金价值能否被执行的问题。第三章论述了保单现金价值的归属问题,针对投保人、被保险人、受益人与保单持有人,分别分析以上各主体对保单现金价值是否有所有权,在何种情况下拥有该所有权。综合比较我国现行法律框架下各种可能的保单现金价值实现方式后,指明通过法院强制执行解除保险合同、质押或转让保单取得相应对价、投保人自行解除保险合同三种方式的利弊,进而对我国司法提出具体而明确的建议,从投保人意图、保险合同类型、涉案保单现金价值金额等多角度为司法实践提供借鉴。第四章,对我国现存的立法不明问题提出可行的建设性意见,结合德国、日本与美国的立法现状对我国的立法、执法提供的有益启示,具体论述了有关赋予保单现金价值执行过程中受益人的介入权、构建低额保单现金价值执行豁免制度等迫切需要解决的问题。
[Abstract]:Since the first "Insurance Law" was promulgated and put into effect in 1995, China's insurance industry has entered into a rapid development for 20 years. With China's entry into WTO, the insurance industry has become more and more open to the outside world, and the competition of insurance companies has become increasingly fierce. The insurance consciousness of policy-holder also increases ceaselessly. Against this background, it is particularly important to explore how to guide the harmonious development of the legal relationship between insurance and other departments, one of which is the priority between the legal relationship of insurance contract and the relationship between creditor's rights and liabilities. In the current judicial environment, that is, whether to resolve the dispute between creditor's rights and debts and cancel the insurance contract relationship. Around this issue, judicial activities are caught in a dilemma. When the debtor has no other property to carry out, if the interests of creditors are deemed to be protected, the cash value of the policy held by the debtor is enforced. It means that the legal relationship of the insurance contract gives way to the creditor's debt; if the cash value of the policy is not considered to be owned by the policyholder as the debtor, or if the court considers that the insurance contract is legally existing, the court has no right to enforce it, It means that creditor's rights and liabilities give way to the legal relationship of insurance contract. Different viewpoints lead to inconsistency of judicial results, which impair the rights and interests of some rights holders, at the same time, the credibility of the judicature is questioned. On the basis of analyzing the nature and attribution of the cash value of the insurance policy, this article will explore and perfect the legislation on the enforcement of the cash value of the insurance policy during the life insurance contract in our country, combining with the cases and the foreign legal situation. The main contents of this paper are as follows: the first chapter leads to the practical problems in the judicial activities through the case: the problem of whether the cash value of the policy can be implemented is not consistent, which leads to the inconsistency of the judicial decision. The discretion of the judge in the case is not conducive to the realization of justice, but leads to the potential injustice of justice, in order to safeguard the interests of creditors, legal authority, and the interests of the insurer. The paper puts forward some problems related to the cash value of insurance policies which will be discussed in this paper. The second chapter starts with the definition and source of the cash value of the policy, and analyzes the reasons and the process of the transformation from the premium paid by the insured to the cash value of the policy. Based on the comparison between insurance premium and the cash value of the policy, the viewpoint that the insurance policy with cash value should belong to the form of securities is obtained, which solves the problem of whether the cash value of the policy can be carried out. The third chapter discusses the ownership of the policy cash value. For the policyholder, the insured, the beneficiary and the policy holder, the author analyzes whether and under what circumstances the above subjects have the ownership of the policy cash value. After a comprehensive comparison of various possible ways of realizing the cash value of insurance policies under the current legal framework of our country, it is pointed out that the relevant consideration can be obtained by enforcing the rescission of insurance contracts by the courts, pledging or transferring the insurance policies. The advantages and disadvantages of three ways for the policy holder to terminate the insurance contract on his own, and then to put forward concrete and definite suggestions to the judicature of our country, which provide the reference for the judicial practice from the aspects of the policy holder's intention, the type of the insurance contract, the amount of cash involved in the insurance policy and so on. In the fourth chapter, the author puts forward some feasible and constructive suggestions on the existing legislative problems in our country, combining with the current legislative situation of Germany, Japan and the United States, it provides beneficial enlightenment to our legislation and law enforcement. This paper specifically discusses the urgent problems that need to be solved, such as giving the beneficiaries the right to intervene in the process of carrying out the cash value of the policy and constructing the exemption system for the implementation of the cash value of the low value policy.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D922.284

【相似文献】