Legal Study on the Introduction of Insurance Claim Rights Trust

This paper aims to propose improvements to relevant legislation for the introduction of an insurance claim rights trust system in South Korea by comparing it with case studies from major countries. In life insurance contracts where the insured's death is the insurance event, death benefits can be effectively used as a means of inheritance. Death benefits naturally belong to the designated beneficiaries, who are generally family members. Even if the beneficiaries are not family, the policyholder would typically hope that they will use the death benefit efficiently. However, various situations may arise where the beneficiaries may be unable to manage the funds effectively due to limited capacity, tendencies for wastefulness, or simply a lack of trust in the heirs. Utilizing death benefits and similar payments as trust property can help realize the policyholder's true intentions while also enabling stable asset management. Trusts have evolved from a means of transferring assets to an arrangement that supplements guardianship, thereby replacing inheritance. In this context, the insurance claim rights trust becomes particularly useful. While South Korea has not yet adopted an insurance claim rights trust, the recent phenomenon of wealth transfer has become pronounced, and interest in using life insurance for inheritance has grown, making discussions about the introduction of this system timely. Specifically, the study defines a comprehensive concept of insurance claim rights trusts, including their functions and necessity, while distinguishing them from similar systems such as life insurance assignments and insurance benefit trusts. The study investigates and analyzes the insurance claim rights trust systems in major countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, China, and Taiwan. There are notable differences between trust property types and management methods, trust contract establishment and operation, and purposes between common law and civil law countries, which are discussed to derive implications. The paper also explores the structure that could be assumed for introducing insurance claim rights trusts in South Korea, critically examines why this system has not yet been adopted, and considers what measures are necessary for its implementation. Additionally, the types and structures of possible insurance claim rights trusts, along with their issues and areas for improvement, are examined. A common finding is that the formal beneficiary would become the trust company. While the actual benefits would be enjoyed by the trust beneficiaries, issues arise regarding conflicting interests (self-dealing), the nature of trust property, and the transferability of insurance claim rights. In this regard, amendments to the “Capital Market Act” are necessary to redefine the scope of property that trust companies can hold, ultimately allowing for all types of property with a proprietary nature to be entrusted. It would also be advisable to limit the scope of insurance claim rights that can be established as trust property to those that can be definitively determined, such as death or savings insurance. Provisions should be included to prevent the termination of insurance contracts in cases where the monetary value of insurance claim rights changes, such as through policy loans, and should allow for the inclusion of policyholder beneficiary change clauses. Finally, the scope of exceptions for conflicting interest transactions should be expanded, especially to allow exceptions for self-dealing when there is consent from the trust beneficiary. In conclusion, the type of insurance claim rights trust that seems most suitable for South Korea is one that designates the policyholder as the trustor and the beneficiaries as the trustees. This aligns with the common types adopted in major countries such as the United States, China, Taiwan, and Japan.