論保險業務員與保險公司間之勞務契約類型 -以大法官會議釋字第740號解釋出發

Abstract

有關於保險公司與其保險業務員之勞務契約爭議，民事法院認為兩造間契約關係非屬勞動基準法之勞動契約關係；但行政法院之判決卻認定為勞動基準法之勞動契約關係。有鑑於民事法院與行政法院見解歧異，因此南山人壽申請大法官統一解釋，並作出釋字第740號解釋。\n釋字740號指出保險業務員為其所屬保險公司從事保險招攬業務而訂立之勞務契約，基於私法自治原則，有契約形式及內容之選擇自由，保險招攬業務契約不必然一定為勞動契約，仍應就個案事實及整體契約，按勞務契約之類型特徵，依勞務債務人與勞務債權人間從屬性程度之高低以斷，並提出「自由決定勞務給付之方式」與「自行負擔業務風險」二項判斷標準。解釋理由書另強調，保險業務員管理規則係依保險法第177條之規定所訂定，目的在於強化對保險業務員從事招攬保險行為之行政管理，並非限定保險公司與其所屬業務員之勞務給付型態應為僱傭關係，不得逕以該管理規則作為保險業務員與其所屬保險公司間是否構成勞動契約之認定依據。\n不過釋字第740號解釋出現後，勞雇雙方仍對於其契約關係呈現各不同認知。爰本論文就保險公司與其保險業務員間之契約屬性爭議始末、爭議狀態問題難解之癥結等爭點，蒐集行政機關函釋、學說、法院判決及比較法文獻整理相關見解，進行剖析保險公司與其保險業務員間勞務契約類型，並從司法實務判決及學者論述之立論基礎，突顯實務對於保險業務員勞務契約類型的差異，以試圖從其中發現實務判決間歧異及可能的解決方式。

There is about the controversy of labor contracts between insurance company and agents, Civil Court judged that the relationships between insurance company and agents didn`t attribute to the relationships of Labor Standards Act but Administrative Court did. Due to the divergent opinions of Civil Court and Administrative Court, Nan Shan Life insurance company apply to the Justices of the Constitutional Court for uniform interpretation of Judicial interpretations No.740.\nJudicial interpretations No.740 points out that insurance company make contracts with agents to recruit insurance policy holders for business. On the basis of the principle of autonomy, the form and content of the contract can be freely chosen, thus it doesn`t have to be a labor contract. How to make a contract based on these reasons, such as the type and characteristic of contracts, the extent of subordination between service debtor and labor creditor; furthermore, "for labor free to choose how to pay " and "do service themselves" these two standard of decisions. The book of J. Y. Interpretation stressed additional reasons that the rules of agent`s management was set up on the basis of the laws of life insurance No.177. The purpose strengthens administrative management of behavior how agents recruit insurance policy holders for business but limit how to pay between insurance company and agents as employment relationships. It shouldn`t determine if l insurance company make contracts with agents to recruit insurance policy holders for business with the administrative management.\nAfter the explanation of Judicial interpretations No.740, there are different cognition of the contracts between employers and labors. The dissection of study is based on the whole story of controversy and how difficult to resolve of labor contracts between life insurance companies and agents. It also gathers correspondences and theories of administrative authority, judgments and comparative methods of court to dissect the definition between life insurance companies and agents. In addition to this, based on the judgments of actual cases and theories of scholars to demonstrate the different definition between life insurance companies and agents then find possible way of solution from different judgments of actual cases to solve it.