保险诈骗罪的适用与刑法干预的边界--以李某航延险诈骗案为视角  

The Application of Insurance Fraud and the Boundary of Its Criminal Law Intervention--From the perspective of Li insurance fraud

作　　者：金泽刚[1] 孙鉴 Jin Zegang;Sun Jian(Tongji University,Shanghai 200092)

机构地区：[1]同济大学法学院,上海200092 [2]同济大学马克思主义学院,上海200092

出　　处：《警学研究》2020年第4期54-62,共9页Police Science Research

基　　金：金泽刚教授主持的国家社科基金一般项目“信息化条件下特大城市犯罪治理研究”的阶段性研究成果,项目编号:17BXF188。

摘　　要：针对李某航延险诈骗案,出罪与入罪的支持者都有,但内部均未达成观点的统一。保险诈骗罪的法定犯本质决定了其具有双重违法性特征。虚构保险标的主要有"恶意夸大""以次充好""虚构利益"等形式,而航空延误险的保险标的为航班的准时性,只要航班确实发生延误,即便李某存在非真实出行意愿、未进行登机等行为,也不属于虚构保险标的。同时,李某在申请理赔前不存在"虚假申报"和"恶意蔓延"等行为,故亦不属于夸大损失程度。因此,李某的行为难以构成保险诈骗罪。相反,其隐瞒出行意愿与民法的诚实信用原则相抵牾,或应承担合同无效、退赔保险金的民事责任。此类刑民交叉案件中,刑法须秉持第二位阶法的品格,即刑法的第二性特征,尊重市场规律,将平等主体间的权利义务关系交由民事法进行调整。Regarding the Li insurance fraud,the conviction did not reach a unified point of view.The legal nature of the crime of insurance fraud determines its double illegality.Fictitious insurance object are mainly in the form of malicious exaggeration,shoddy,fictitious benefits,The insurance object of aviation delay insurance is the punctuality of the flight.As long as the flight is indeed delayed,even if Li has an unreal intention to travel and fails to board the plane,it is not a fictitious subject of insurance.On the contrary,he concealed his travel willingness to contradicted the principle of the faith in the civil law,and he should bear the civil liability for invalid contract and refund of insurance money.In such criminal-civil cases,the criminal law must uphold the character of the second-order law,that is,the secondary characteristics of the criminal law,respect the laws of the market,and submit the rights and obligations between equal subjects to the civil law for adjustment.

关 键 词：航空延误险 诈骗 虚构保险标的 刑民交织 

分 类 号：D924.35[政治法律—刑法学]