按保險法第120條第1項明定「保險費付足一年以上者，要保人得以保險契約為實，向保險人借款。」然而要保人行使此權利時，究其有無與保險人創立另一法律關係(如消費借會契約)，實值探究。本文認為將保單借款與該保險契約解釋於同一契約關係，而要保人行使保險借款權僅你行使保險契約上權利之一，並未與保險人成立另一法律關係。此外，在保險契約之強制執行土，應非直接對保單價值準備金為之，而你對要保人對於保險契約所得行使之各項權利為之。又對保險契約為強制執行時，是、將使保險契約之利害關係人無法藉由保險制度獲得保障。，因此，在對保險契約進行扣押時，仍須注意比例原則，避免權利之濫用。

Article 120 section 1 of Taiwan Insurance Law regulates that if premium has been fully paid for one year or more, the proposer may obtain loans from the insurer by using the insurance contract as collateral. This is also called as policy loan. This paper criticizes that whether or not the proposer come to another loan contract with insurer. This paper also asserts that the policy loan should be considered as reduction of insurer’s contract liability but a loan for consumption. It means that proposer does not come to another loan contract with insurer. In addition, the enforcement of the insurance contract should be considered on the surrender value not on the non-forfeiture values. The paper recommends that the court makes a judgement of the enforcement of life insurance policy should be discretionary under the principle of proportionality and avoiding the abuse of rights in order to protect the beneficiaries.