Correlation between the duty to notify and the duty to notify changes or increases in risk

There are cases where the risk causing the insured accident is left to the subjective choice of the insured, such as when the policyholder hid the fact that he or she uses or drives a motorcycle when signing the insurance contract and then continued to drive the motorcycle without notifying the insurer of this fact, or when the policyholder hid the fact that he or she is engaged in a dangerous occupation and then signed the insurance contract and then continued to engage in that occupation. If the insured fails to notify the risk, a breach of the duty to notify is recognized. However, if the risk is realized after the insurance contract is concluded, the issue is whether the duty to notify the risk will be recognized. This is the issue of whether the breach of the duty to notify will be considered to be absorbed into the breach of the duty to notify when the breach of the duty to notify is recognized. Risk is divided into subjective risk and objective risk. Subjective risk can be selected at the will of the insured, etc. Therefore, when determining whether to recognize the duty to notify despite the breach of the duty to notify, subjective risk needs to be viewed differently from objective risk. If objective risk is not notified at the time of concluding an insurance contract, if the risk has not significantly changed or increased after concluding the insurance contract, it does not violate the group nature of insurance and therefore does not need to be separately notified. However, considering that subjective risk can be realized or avoided by the insured's choice after concluding the insurance contract, it is considered necessary to notify the insured of the choice when the insured selects the risk, as this is considered an increase in risk. This is because the risk changes depending on the choice. If the insured does not avoid the subjective risk but selects it, it is difficult to view the risk as being the same as the risk at the time of concluding the insurance contract. On the other hand, considering the good faith of insurance, if the duty to notify is uniformly denied in cases where a breach of the duty to notify is acknowledged, it would result in protecting policyholders who intentionally breached their duty more strongly than policyholders in good faith who did not notify the subject of notification without intent or negligence, which is unfair. Therefore, the right to cancel an insurance contract should be recognized for reasons such as breach of duty to notify of changes or increases in risk and breach of prohibition on changes or increases in risk, even if there is a breach of duty to notify of subjective risks