| China’s "Insurance Law" gives the insurer the right to arbitrarily cancel the insurance contract.The root cause lies in the disparity in the strength of the parties to the contract and the information asymmetry,aiming at realizing the substantive fairness of the contractual rights and obligations.However,within the opposite party of the insurer,the right to arbitrarily revoke the contract to the insured is the dislocation of the legislative position of the contracting party and thus deviates from the nature of the insurance and the nature of the insurance contract,thus presenting the insured’s insurance subject.It enjoys the benefits of insurance,but the insured person has the eccentricity of control over the validity of the contract.The obligation to pay premiums,the bundling of savings and investment on insurance,and the general business logic of “who invests,who benefits” have deepened people’s misinformation about the status of the insured’s insurance contract.In essence,the legally arbitrary right of reinstatement of the insured shall originate from the authorization of the insured or the legal agent of the insured based on the identity of the guardian.This paper believes that arranging the status of the insured and the insured from the perspective of the situation and correspondingly arranging rights and obligations is the basis for the future revision and improvement of legislation.Specifically,the main content of this paper is divided into five chapters: The first chapter introduces the difference between the two major legal systems in the insurance contract subject and its rights and obligations structure,and combines China’s current Insurance Law and related legislative system to explore In the insurance contract in which the insured’s death is the condition for the payment of the insurance premium,the insured agrees to the insured’s intention to the insured after agreeing to the insured’s insurance and making the contract effective.In the case of death,disability or illness,the insurer has to be exempted from the drawbacks of the similar system,and initially pointed out that the current insurance law in China does not really take the insurance contractor as the protection object in the system design,and then leads out The question of why the insurance contract guarantees the object.The second chapter analyzes the causes of the establishment of insurance contract parties in China.China follows the legislative framework of the "three-point method".In the field of insurance contracts,both parties to the insurance contract are designated as insurers and policyholders,and the insured is only the insurance contract holder.This article combines relevant academic views and judicial decisions to find out the reasons for the lack of persuasion and lack of persuasiveness through step by step.First of all,it was adversely affected by China’s early insurance laws and administrative regulations.Later,it was promoted by the logical relationship between the insured,the subject matter of insurance and the insurance interest.In addition,it was affected by the general business rules of “who invests,who benefits”.Because of the result of the legislative status of China’s insurance legal system,it can be said that there are both historical reasons and practical reasons.The third chapter rectifies the various factors of the factors found in the second chapter,and points out that there are translation and understanding deviations in the early insurance laws and administrative regulations in China,and the legal analysis of the existence value of insurance benefits,supplemented by the agency system.And the infiltration of the management of the insurance contract field and the conceptual analysis of the third-party interest contract,aiming at systematically refuting the above-mentioned factors,pointing out the irrationality of the legislative style of the current insurance contract.On the basis of the above chapters,the fourth chapter further explains the shortcomings of the relevant legislation of the insurer in China’s current legislation,and continues to point out from the perspective of comparative law that the legislation of our country draws on the results of the two major legal systems,but it is a glimpse of the leopard and self-defeating.Not only is the unclear position of the insurer’s opposite party unclear,but also the logic of the application and attribution of the insurance interest is not reasonable.The legal system of the beneficiary’s designated power is not very reasonable,and the theoretical confusion and the cumbersome application are added.The fifth chapter aims to reconstruct the system of insurance contract parties in China.Firstly,it summarizes the distribution of rights and obligations of various subjects in China’s current law,and finds that the insured is the party of the insurance contract,but does not have the right to claim the insurance.Corresponding rights,while the insured is not the contract party but can influence the validity status of the contract.This abnormal situation is scattered in many provisions of China’s Insurance Law,which not only brings great confusion to the theoretical circle,but also practice.The world has brought many criticisms.In the end,this paper provides the reconstruction idea of the insured’s rights and obligations system.Firstly,it reconstructs the relationship between the insured and the insurance subject and the insured to determine the basic subject framework,so as to achieve the basis of the framework.The purpose of the insurer’s property and personal rights obligations is to be reconstructed. |
