Research On The Joint Crime Of Insurance Fraud

The crime of insurance fraud takes on the characteristics of community, intelligentization and covertness. In practice, insurance fraud crimes are usually committed by joint offenders. In crime of insurance fraud, criminal subjects have special status. They criminal subjects only have such three categories as insurance applicant, the insured and the beneficiary. However, joint crimes in insurance fraud usually involve other subjects including internal staff of insurance company, insurance agency, vehicle repairers, vehicle sellers, etc. In such crimes, various subjects with different status, functions, activities and purposes are interconnected with the result of bringing difficulty to combing case facts, conviction and sentencing.The basic precondition for research of insurance fraud joint offence is to explore whether non-status persons may become joint offenders of insurance fraud crime. The author argues that non-status persons may and should be included in joint offenders by analyzing domestic and foreign legislation, relationship between status and joint offence, breach of special obligations, complexity of insurance fraud activities and blow on insurance frauds. Non-status persons may act as instigators, accessory offenders, or joint principal offenders in joint crimes. From the perspective of act of perpetrating, only those responsible for customer services within insurance companies have the likelihood of participating or involving in acts of perpetrating and hence become joint principal offenders. Two typical forms of joint offence in insurance fraud crime are joint offence committed by internal and external collusion and joint offence committed by appraiser of insurance accident, authenticator and property evaluator. There are considerable controversy on the former joint offence since it is related to both honest official duties of the insiders n insurance company and relevant rules and regulations. The author critically analyzes different theories on this kind of joint offence and argues that theory of core roles plus theory of imaginative criminal overlap appears to be more reasonable. The offenders should be convicted and sentenced by using imaginative criminal overlap and the whole criminal act should be determined according to the criminal nature of offenders with core roles. As regards the latter form of joint offence, their joint offence with policy holder under conspiracy can be understood under general theory of joint offence. However, section 198(4) of Criminal Law simply describes these subjects unilaterally assist policy holders in implementing insurance fraud activities and they are considered as joint offenders of insurance fraud under the law. The debates on this kind of joint offence hence arises. Through literal interpretation, systematic interpretation and purpose interpretation, it is argued that section 198(4) is a special provision to one-sided accomplice. The joint offence committed by appraiser of insurance accident, authenticator and property evaluator has two kinds, conspirator and one-sided accomplice.In judicial practice, the handling of above joint crimes needs theoretical support. The author obtains further understanding of joint offence in insurance fraud crime through summarizing, analyzing and reviewing relevant resources in insurance fraud crime. It is hopeful that this paper could inspire interests in study of insurance fraud crime for the perfection of insurance law.