医保诈骗行为定性处罚问题研究——兼评《刑法》第30条、第266条之立法解释

Research on the Qualitative Punishment of Medical Insurance Fraud

长期以来,对医保诈骗行为如何定性处罚,理论分歧严重,司法乱象横生,极大地损害了法律权威和司法公信力。《刑法》第30条和第266条立法解释的出台只是解决目前司法困境的权益之计,其将医保诈骗行为定性为诈骗罪不符合刑法对犯罪的分类标准,对单位实施纯正自然人犯罪的规定只追究自然人的刑事责任有悖于刑法设立单位犯罪的初衷,并且突破了罪刑法定、罪责刑相适应等原则的基本要求。要科学合理地解决医保诈骗行为的定性处罚问题,可以借鉴域外社保制度发达国家的立法经验,结合我国实际,新增社会保险诈骗罪,规定社会保险诈骗单位犯罪,这既可以解决医保诈骗行为的司法定性处罚乱象问题,平息相关理论争议,又可以消除人们对立法解释合理性的质疑以及由此带来的对刑法基本原则相违背的担忧。

For a long time, there are serious theoretical differences in how to qualitatively punish medical insurance fraud, which has greatly impaired legal authority and judicial credibility. The relevant legislative interpretations introduction has only periodic solution in the current judicial predicament, such as the identification of medical insurance fraud as the common fraud crime does not conform to the classification standard of crimes in criminal law and so on. We should draw lessons from the legislative experience of foreign developed countries with the social security systems, stipulate the new types of social insurance fraud crime and social insurance fraud unit crime, this will not only solve the chaotic phenomenon of judicial qualitative punishment and deal with the relevant theoretical disputes, but also eliminate the relevant theoretical controversy of legislative interpretation.