「為他人利益之保險契約」對保險制度保障個人生活、維護社會安全之作用的發揮，乃有積極助益，蓋締結保險契約支付保險費所換取因危險之轉嫁所生之保障利益以及由保障利益所生保險金給付請求權，若限於由該支付保險費之保險契約當事人所享有，則勢必減損了保險契約締結的機會，如此一來，藉由締結保險契約以加入能分散危險、填補損失之保險制度者，必然減少，保險制度保障個人生活、維護社會安全之作用，必遭抑制。因之，大陸法系保險契約法，例如德國保險契約法、日本商法典第三編商行為第十章保險等，無不明文承認「為他人利益之保險契約」，我國保險法亦於第四五條前段明文規定之。我國保險法，在淵源上與日本商法典第三編商行為第十章保險關係密切，屬於大陸法系保險契約法之系統，但之後陸續公布施行之修正保險法，相關修正條文則是參酌了英美法系保險契約法，使我國保險法於大陸法系保險契約法之原先基礎上滲入了英美法系保險契約法之制度，致使現行保險法成為兼採大陸法系保險契約法與英美法系保險契約法之混合系統，現行保險法條文間屢現扞格，解釋適用上迭生疑義，而「為他人利益之保險契約」因至少事涉要保人與被保險人，若為為他人利益之死亡定額保險契約，更涉及受益人，故而亦不免有此困擾。因此，本文乃試圖以大陸法系保險契約法之角度，檢討、釐清我國保險法上「為他人利益之保險契約」之解釋適用。

　　There is a basic and important difference between the continental insurance contract law system and the Anglo-American insurance contract law system. The continental insurance contract law system constructed the relationship of insurance contract in “three-division theory” which means the relationship of insurance contract constructed by the applicant for insurance, the insured, and the insurer. The Anglo-American insurance contract law system constructed the relationship of insurance contract in“two-division theory” which means the relationship of insurance contract constructed by the insured and the insurer. Obviously, the role of the insured is different in the continental insurance contract law system and the Anglo-American insurance contract law system, and it deeply influences the interpretation and application insurance contract for the benefit of third party. Under our insurance act, it is better to interpret and apply the insurance contract for third-party beneficiary in the manner of the view of continental insurance contract law system because of the civillaw system our country adopts.