近年來火災發生次數頻繁，火災損失之金額多則高達數百億元，民眾藉由保險契約的簽訂，以轉嫁其風險。然而火災發生之原因繁多，惟保險事故係因人為因素所引起，如第三人對此事故需負責者，自可藉由保險制度給付被保險人後，再向第三人行使保險代位。 「保險代位」的爭議與問題，一直是保險法的焦點之ㄧ。其中牽涉保險法、保險理賠、損害補償原則、保險契約..等層面。本研究將國內及國外一些保險代位原則的運用及危險事故與損害補償間的相互關係加以探討，透過火險個案研究，分析爭議之所在，明確了解我國保險法所規定代位是屬於債權之「法定移轉」，並規定被保險人不得任意拋棄代位權、保險人及再保險人亦同樣享有法定代位權、另「物上代位」是以火災保險單增列條文中規定。藉由本研究，使代位的關係問題，在保險實務的處理上，能夠得到保險人應負賠償責任與否之依循準則。 In recent years, many fire accidents happened and caused tremendous losses, even exceeding tens of billion dollars. Hence, people spread losses by way of purchasing insurance. Nevertheless, there are plenty of reasons to bring about a fire. If it is a man-made loss, the insurer is able to exercise subrogation against any liable third party, after settling the claim with the insured. The disputes and the relevant problems resulting from the subrogation are always a focus of Law of Insurance, which involve Law of Insurance, insurance claim, Principle of Indemnity and insurance contracts. The research further studies the subrogation applications as well as the relations between the hazards and loss indemnity operated in domestic and foreign insurance markets. Through some fire case studies and the analysis of the disputes, they clearly indicate that the subrogation stipulated in the Law of Insurance is a kind of “transfer of Obligation” of Civil Code. At the same time, the insureds are not allowed to waive the subrogation and the insurers as well as reinsurers can also exercise the subrogation. Furthermore, right of ownership is a new regulation of property insurance polcies. The research also can be a guideline whether the insurer is responsible for the claim in respect of the subrogation issue in practical operation.
