Insurance Fraud Crime And Solving Practice Problem

Insurance fraud is not a necessary accomplice, but often in the form of joint crime in the judicial practice. The five kinds of insurance fraud behavior itself has particularity, plus is an accomplice theory itself is one of the criminal law educational world three big black hole, resulting in the judicial practice that insurance fraud crime has become a difficult problem. In this paper, based on relevant cases, the case analysis, it is concluded that a series of practical problems, based on the academic theoretical controversy and judicial practice of carding and analyzes the different methods of thinking solves the practical problem, solve the judicial practice to help common issue the cognizance of the crime of insurance fraud. This paper is divided into four parts:The first part is the cognizance of the unit and natural person mutual insurance fraud. First of all, the common scam by case leads to a natural person and unit standard of conviction, and then points out that the academic circles on the existence "unit standard said" "principal standard said" "standard" respectively three point of view and its evaluation, think common scam conviction standard shall be based on standard said to condemn, respectively. Second, the typical case raises in the unit and natural person common scam sentencing standards, and list the theoretical circle of criminal law three kinds of opinions on this issue and its evaluation, think common scam sentencing criteria should be based on principal sentencing standards, by points of discussion.There is no special identity to participate in the second part is the cognizance of insurance fraud. First of all, composed of insurance fraud case raises no identity is a common crime this question, and analyze the related dispute, think no identity behavior does not have the obligation of insurance fraud of the special identity of behavior in violation and common crime must be kept the same connotation and separate crime. Second case lead to the internal and external collusion defrauds insurance money by the related behavior of qualitative controversy, through the discussion of the academic dispute, think that defrauds insurance money behavior is whether by use of the properties of the key factors that determine the position convenient defrauds insurance money, this "cheating" conform to the job occupation crime or meaning does not comply with the provisions of the crime of fraud of the corruption of diddle diddle, thus it is concluded that the behavior of the internal and external collusion defrauds insurance money shall be uniformly to job occupation crime or corruption punishment.The third part is a special identity to participate in the cognizance of insurance fraud. First of all, by the typical case raises defrauds insurance money in the form of self-harm difficulty of each joint crime suspects, and then points out the key problem is that the insured, the problem of how to the problem of identifying different will lead to all the common criminal suspects. Think that defrauds insurance money in the form of self-harm each joint crime suspect shall, in accordance with paragraph 1 item 3 of article 198 of the criminal law punishment. Second, by the case raises insurance accident whether constitute one-sided accomplice of insurance fraud, the expert of related dispute, think such as expert witnesses for unilateral deliberately can constitute one-sided accomplice of insurance fraud.The fourth part is a common crime of insurance fraud subjective intent. First of all, whether through the indirect intent of accomplice in insurance fraud intentionally in the form of integration and analysis of the theoretical controversy, think of accomplice in indirect intent for insurance fraud also accord with the general theory of joint crime intentionally form insurance fraud criminal law about the accomplice. Second, by the related case raises no identity is based on the generalization and no specific most insurant intentionally deliberately decided that defrauds insurance money at the same time of the contents of the question, through the practice of department of judicial cases, from different points of view that should be based on summarizing the intentionally and insurant intentionally content not at the same time, a whole set of insurance fraud.