我國在民國81年時，正式於保險法中立法規範保險安定基金之相關事項，迄今已逾十五年。在民國96年修法後，我國保險安定基金制度更有了重大變革：不但產壽險安定基金合併且組織實體化成為專責機構，保險法第143條之3也增訂了第一項第四～六款，擴大保險安定基金得辦理之事項，未來的角色不再只是單純的資金之收付、管理，而是更積極參與保險業之監理與退場機制之運作。而保險安定基金經歷如此大幅度的變革，無可避免將會面臨許多問題。 因此本研究將保險安定基金與金融制度完善之英國的金融服務補償計畫，以及處理我國存款金融機構退場事件經驗豐富，功能與組織皆堪稱完備的中央存款保險公司進行制度比較，並對於保險安定基金各層面改革之相關問題，諸如法律規範、組織架構、資金之徵收、資金不足之處理、各項工作執掌及作業、與其他單位之配合等事項，提出具體建議以供主管機關參考。 / The Insurance Stabilization Fund system of Taiwan, found in 1992, has operated for more than 15 years according to the Insurance Act. After the amendment of 2007, some major differences were brought to the system. First of all, the two originally independent foundations for life and non-life insurance stabilization fund would be merged and organized with substantial structure. Moreover, by amending article 143-3 of the act, the legislature expanded more functions for the stabilization fund. As a result, the Fund would no longer be just a “pay box”, but instead, handling the liquidation procedures, and providing constructive assistance to the regulation of insurers. However, with the scale and level of the reform, it is inevitable to face lots of challenges and problems. The following study dedicated to the introduction of the Insurance Stabilization Fund in Taiwan, the Financial Services Compensation Scheme of the UK and Central Deposit Insurance Corporation in Taiwan, then make thorough comparison over main aspects among the three systems. Through the analysis with these three systems, this study will provide solutions and recommendations to the conflicts that may occur.