無照駕駛不保條款修正芻議– 兼評臺灣高等法院高雄分院98年度保險上易字 第7號民事判決

任意汽車保險與強制汽車責任保險不同，被保險人無照駕駛所生之損害或賠償責 任在任意汽車保險屬於除外不保事項，無論無照駕駛之被保險人是不是有過失，也不 論被保險人對於事故的發生是不是可歸責，都不影響保險人不負賠償責任之結果。惟 鑑於目前實務上之保單條款用語易生疑義，因此，本文建議根本地做法還是對條款之 擬定，做適當之修正，以杜絕爭議。本文將先論述應如何解釋系爭條款，再對法院之 判決作深入的評論，進而提出結論與建議。 關鍵詞：無照駕駛、除外危險、除外條款、不保事項、隱藏性義務、對價平衡

Abstract
Non-compulsory automobile insurance is different from compulsory automobile liability insurance. Any damage or liability to pay compensation occurred from the period of driving without a license by the insured is one of exclusion in Non- compulsory automobile insurance. An insurer was not liable for payment of insurance benefits, whether the insured was fault or not. Also regardless of the insured for the accident is attributable. After review so many judgments and the current actual situation, there are different view of the term of the policy clause. Therefore, this article suggests that the fundamental approach is appropriate to modify the clause to put an end of the dispute. This article will first discuss how to interpret the disputed clause, and then review the judgments, and make conclusions and recommendations finally. Keywords: driving without a license, excluded risk, exception, exclusion, recessive obligations, the Principle of Equality of the Premium and Coverage