The Insurance Business Act (Japanese: \u4fdd\u967a\u696d\u6cd5) is a law that has been enacted with the aim of:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n“Contributing to the stability of the lives of the people and the sound development of the national economy by ensuring the sound and proper operation of the insurance business and the fairness of insurance solicitation, in view of the public nature of the insurance business, and thereby protecting insurance policyholders and others.”<\/p>\nArticle 1 of the Insurance Business Act (Japanese: \u4fdd\u967a\u696d\u6cd5\u7b2c1\u6761)<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\nUnder the Insurance Business Act, the insurance business is defined as “a business that undertakes the acceptance of insurance that agrees to pay a certain amount of insurance money in relation to the survival or death of a person and collects insurance premiums, insurance that agrees to compensate for damage that may occur due to a certain accidental accident and collects insurance premiums, and other insurance.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to Article 3 of the Insurance Business Act (Japanese: \u4fdd\u967a\u696d\u6cd5\u7b2c3\u6761), the insurance business can only be conducted by those who have received a license from the Prime Minister.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Therefore, when a company that has not received a license offers products or services with insurance-like options, it is necessary to consider whether those options fall under insurance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/span>Does Insurance-like Options Fall Under Insurance or Guarantee Securities Business?<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\nThere are two types of licenses in the insurance business: life insurance and non-life insurance. Insurance-like options may fall under the category of non-life insurance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If insurance-like options fall under the category of “insurance that compensates for damages that may occur due to certain accidental incidents and collects insurance premiums” or “guarantee securities business,” a non-life insurance license is required.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/span>Insurance-like Options Do Not Fall Under Insurance<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\nSince there is no definition of insurance under the Insurance Business Act,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\nit must be determined according to the economic personalityistics, the legislative purpose of the Insurance Business Act, and social common sense<\/p>\nKansai Insurance Law Study Group “Commentary on the Insurance Business Law (I)” (hereinafter, “Commentary”) page 196<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\nIt is considered. Based on this perspective, when considering insurance-like options, they cannot be said to be<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\na system or institution that pools the same type of risk and aims to diversify the risk<\/p>\nCommentary page 196<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\nWhen damage occurs, the company will pay compensation to the user, but the source of this compensation is not the usage fee pooled from the user by the company, but the insurance money paid by the insurance company to the company.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Also,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\nthe policyholder transfers the risk to the insurer in exchange for the insurance premium through the insurance contract with the insurer<\/p>\nCommentary page 196<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\nIt is not of such nature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The usage fee paid by the user to the company is not under the name of insurance premium, and the contract to be concluded is not an insurance contract. Also, as mentioned above, the compensation in case of damage comes from the insurance money paid by the insurance company to the company, so it cannot be said that the risk is transferred to the company. From the above discussion, it can be considered that insurance-like options do not fall under insurance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n