停车状态下交强险赔付问题研究——以“危险”和“危险实现”要件的引入为视角

A Study on Compensation of Compulsory Liability Insurance for Traffic Accidents under Parking State——From the perspective of the introduction of “danger” and “danger realization”

我国在审判实务中,对机动车停车状态下的事故是否应由交强险来赔付,出现了较大的分歧。为了救济受害者,通说倾向于最大限度地救济受害者,由交强险先行赔付。这种处理方式带来了法理论上的混乱,还造成了交强险业务亏损的局面。道交法76条和交强险条例适用的前提是机动车事故所具有的特殊危险性。但是,我国现行法上缺乏表征机动车"危险"和"危险实现"要件的表述。对此,法解释方法可以实现法律适用的限缩,但其不仅不能彻底解决在现行法中引入"危险实现"要件的问题,同时还会带来行政管理范围受限等新问题。借鉴德日两国立法,通过对现行法进行修订,以"运行"表征危险,增加"因运行而"发生道路交通事故要件,可以有效解决机动车停车状态下交强险赔付问题存在的理论混乱并实现司法审判的一致。

In the judicial practice of our country,there are great divergences on whether the accident of motor vehicles under the parking condition should be compensated by the Compulsory Liability Insurance for Traffic Accidents.For the benefit of the victims,the general tendency is to offer the maximum possible relief to the victims,and let the insurance plan make claim payment first.However,this practice has brought about confusion in legal theory,and led to the loss of the compulsory traffic insurance business.Article 76 of the Road Traffic Safety Law and the Regulations on Compulsory Liability Insurance for Motor Vehicle Traffic Accident are applicable on the premise of the special danger of motor vehicle accidents.However,the current Chinese law lacks the expression of the "danger" and "danger realization" elements of motor vehicle accidents.In this respect,the method of legal interpretation can limit the application of law,but it can′t completely solve the problems of introducing the element of "danger realization" into the current law,and may bring about new problems such as the limitation of administrative scope.Drawing lessons from the legislation of Germany and Japan,the current law can be amended by expressing the danger by "operation" and adding the elements of road traffic accidents "caused by operation".Thus we can effectively solve the theoretical confusion existing in the compensation of compulsory traffic liability insurance of motor vehicles under the parking condition and achieve the consistency of judicial trials.