保險法第六十四條關於要保人告知義務之規定，距離前次修正已逾二十年。此二十年間相關爭議案例不但未曾減少，其爭議類型甚至有益加多元的趨勢。現行規範以及相關判例是否已適當地提供解決的方法，卻有疑問。近年德國新保險契約法甫完成百年來的最大幅度修正，該國新法對於要保人告知義務的規定，基於強化保護消費者的目的而採取全新的規範方式，特別是新法限縮保險人的解除權的適用，引進終止權及契約關係調整權，減少要保人因此完全喪失保險保護的可能性，同時兼顧對價平衡原則的維持。另一方面，對於惡意的要保人，也盡可能杜絕其濫用保險制度的機會，以維護危險共同體的利益。此等修正牽涉到最大善意原則、對價平衡原則以及消費者保護等三大理論基礎對於要保人告知義務法制的交錯影響，對於我國法在實務上已經出現的諸多問題，或可作為借鏡。本文擬從我國實務上已經產生的問題出發，再參考德國新法的精神，擷取適合我國的規範，進而對我國法未來的發展提出具體的修正建議。 The last amendation of Article 64 of the Insurance Act took place 20 years ago. In the ensuing two decades, the disputes of disclosure duty have not been reduced but have increased; furthermore, the controversial issues have become diverse and complex. It is doubtful that the disputes can be properly solved by the on-going regulations and precedents. After nearly a hundred years, the German Insurance Act has been completely revised recently. The German Insurance Contract Act, with its new provisions about the obligation of policyholders of disclosure, has adopted the idea of consumer protection; especially the insurer’s right to rescind the contract is kept within certain limits and to enact the right of termination and modification of the contract. Thus, the insured has less possibility of forfeiting the insurance coverage and keep “principle of equivalence” at the same time.On the other hand, the new act prevents the malicious policyholder from abusing the insurance system as much as possible and to maintain the interests of a hazard group. The amendment of the German In-surance Contract Act involves theories of the utmost good faith, and the principles of equivalence and consumer protection. It can serve as a model for practical disputes in Taiwan. The essay begins by probing the practical disputes on incorrect disclosure in Taiwan and observes the intention of the German Insurance Act to acquire applicable provisions for Taiwan. In its conclusion, it provides the overall amendments and suggestions for the further development of the insurance law in Taiwan.