论保险受益人指定不明之解释——评《保险法司法解释(三)》第9条第2款的妥适性

An Explanation on Unidentified Designation of Beneficiary in Insurance Contracts——With comments on the appropriateness of the 2nd Paragraph of Article 9 of the Judicial Interpretation Ⅲ on the Insurance Law

《保险法司法解释(三)》第9条第2款对受益人指定不明的三种情形作出了相应解释,然其解释是否妥适则须进一步斟酌。在我国保险金遗产化的立法背景下,将"法定"的情形解释为"以继承法规定的法定继承人"实易造成法律逻辑上的混乱,故倘若释清保险金遗产化的疑义,宜解释为未指定受益人或指定受益人不明;对受益人仅指定身份关系的,以投保人与被保险人是否同一主体为标准而区分处理即非妥当,宜解释为据保险事故发生时与被保险人的身份关系确定受益人,而无庸区分处理;而对受益人的指定包括姓名与身份关系的,认为未指定受益人亦非恰当,宜解释为以指定的姓名确定受益人。

The Judicial Interpretation Ⅲ on Insurance Law, of which the 2nd paragraph of Article 9 makes interpretation on the three situations of unidentified designation of beneficiary, requires further consideration. Under the legislative background of benefit-turned inheritance, interpreting ＂legal＂ as ＂heir at law according to Inheritance Law＂ can easily cause logical confusion. The appropriate interpretation should be ＂no beneficiary designated or the designated beneficiary cannot be identified＂. When the beneficiary is designated by relationship,it＇ s not suitable to distinguish them according to the standard of whether the policyholder and the insured are the same subject. A proper method is to identify the beneficiary according to the relationship between the beneficiary and the insured when the insurance accident happens. When the beneficiary is designated by name and relationship,it＇s not suitable to regard this situation as no beneficiary is designated. It should identify the beneficiary according to the designated name.