作者：于海纯
作者介绍：对外经济贸易大学教授，国家对外开放研究院研究员
出版日期：2020年8月9日
内容提要 投保人故意违反如实告知义务，在法定抗辩期间经过之后，保险人能否行使 撤销权的问题，涉及保险法上解除权制度与民法上撤销权制度的适用选择。投保人欺诈行 为之下保险人是否可以行使撤销权的争议因保险法上不可抗辩条款的出现而产生，不可抗 辩条款在法理上具有相当的正当性并被普遍法定化。允许保险人行使撤销权将空置化或废 弃不可抗辩制度，进而否定不可抗辩制度的规范意义、目的及其背后的价值判断。且不可抗 辩条款乃是保险人自愿引入保单之中并受其约束，表明其是自愿放弃抗辩权。两相权衡，保 险人解除权制度在整体上具有更大的合理性、正当性、历史性和法秩序价值，应为我国保险 法所选择。
关键词 保险合同 撤销权 解除权 不可抗辩条款 权利放弃
Abstract: Whether the insurer can exercise the right of rescission after the contestable period if the insurance applicant intentionally violates the notification obligation, relates to the choice of application of the system of right of rescission in the insurance law and the right of revocation in the civil law. The dispute over whether the insurer can exercise the right of rescission under the fraudulent act of the applicant arises because of the appearance of the incontestable clause in the insurance law. The incontestable clause is quite legally justified and generally legalized. Allowing the insurer to exercise the right of rescission may vacate or abandon the incontestable system, and then negate the standard meaning, purpose and value judgment behind the incontestable system. The incontestable clause is that the insurer voluntarily introduces into the policy and is bound by it, indicating that it is voluntary to give up the right of defense. The insurer’s right of rescission system has greater rationality, legitimacy, historic nature and legal order value as a whole, which should be selected by China’s insurance law.