Trade insurance is important in promoting exports in Korea, where natural resources are scarce but human resources are abundant. In case of trade insurance, general insurance law is also applied. However, the subject of the insurance law controversy changes with the times. Noteworthy obligations and notification obligations have each been an important issue and continue to be a problem. However, in the near future, problems arise in the area where the two overlap. In other words, in a situation that exists at the boundary, it becomes a subject of notifiable obligation for dangerous circumstances and becomes subject to notification duty at the same time. In such cases, it is a question of which law can be applied to resolve the issue. When the insurance contract was concluded, it was notified that the driver would not drive the motorcycle. At this time, the insured party insisted on one-time use of the two-wheeled vehicle, but after inspecting the insurer, it was confirmed that it was repeatedly used rather than one-time, and the insurer guided the department based on the breach of obligation to inform after contract. Thereafter, it is a matter of disposition when insisting that the use of a motorcycle is made before the insurance contract is concluded, and that the period of bribery has been expired due to the obligation to inform before the contract. In such cases, it is important to check the facts first. However, if you have driven a motorcycle before the contract has been established but have not notified him / her in due time, and if an accident occurs while driving the motorcycle after the warning period has expired, It is a question whether we can reject. In the case of the insurer, the policyholder violated the obligation to insure that the insured person was driving the two-wheeled vehicle, and the result was an objectively increased risk of driving the two-wheeled vehicle in the unknown state. In such a case, it is reasonable to consider that even if the obligation period of obligation has been exceeded, the contract can be terminated and the insurance payment can be refused due to breach of obligation to notify the increase of risk. In the case of Germany, it is presumed that each of the sanctions can be selected if there is a contradiction between the notification obligation violation and the notification obligation violation. It would be contrary to the new law to insist that the insured party insist on the use of a one-time two-wheeler to avoid the obligation to notify the increase in risk, In other words, although the two-wheeled motor operated continuously from before the insured period until after the insured period, it should be able to consider both the obligation to notify the obligation of noticing obligation and the obligation of notification, At this time, if the notice period of violation of notification obligation has passed, it should be interpreted that violation of notice duty can be a problem. In the case of Germany, violations of obligation to obligation and notices of risk increase overlap. In this case, we can find out that sanctions for two types of violations can be selected by the insurer. In our case, the insurer should not interpret the risk, so it should be interpreted that it is possible to raise the violation of the disclosure obligation and the violation of the notice obligation. Therefore, even if the warning period is warned against the obligation, it is possible to raise the obligation to notify the obligation to raise the risk within 1 month.