Recently, a heartbreaking and infuriating piece of news emerged online: a man named He from Wanping Village, Langtang Town, Xinhua County, Hunan Province, concocted an illegal scheme to fake his death in a car accident to defraud insurance. Naturally, such an act was doomed to fail, but it triggered a tragic catastrophe. He's wife (Dai) believed his "death" was real, convinced her husband had truly "died." Overwhelmed by grief at the sudden loss of her family's emotional and financial pillar, she drowned herself along with her two children, extinguishing three precious lives.

Dai took her children to their deaths from this embankment (Image source: Internet)

On October 12, 2018, He surrendered himself to the Meiyuan Police Station of Xinhua County Court.

Investigation revealed that to evade over 100,000 yuan in online loans, He secretly purchased a personal accident insurance policy with a compensation amount of 1 million yuan from an insurance company on September 7, hiding it from his wife, Dai Huihua (31, from Tuanjie Mountain Village, Langtang Town). In the early hours of September 19, He used a borrowed vehicle to stage a fake car crash at the Zijiang River section of Chengping Village, Caojia Town, Xinhua County, creating the illusion of a fatal accident in an attempt to defraud insurance money.

Currently, He is under criminal detention by public security authorities on suspicion of intentional destruction of property and insurance fraud. The case is under further investigation.

Regarding this tragedy, does He bear criminal responsibility for his wife's suicide? How should the charges of intentional destruction of property and insurance fraud be determined? These questions have drawn widespread attention.

Question 1

Does He need to bear criminal responsibility for his wife taking their children to commit suicide?

He's wife chose to act because she believed her husband had died. The consequences of He's actions were extremely severe, but He did not intend for his wife and children to commit suicide. Therefore, he can only be convicted based on his prior criminal conduct.

Question 2

Whether He Mou has committed the crime of intentional destruction of property?

According to China's criminal law, the crime of intentional destruction of property refers to the intentional destruction or damage of public or private property, involving a relatively large amount or other serious circumstances. In other words, it is the act of intentionally and unlawfully destroying or damaging public property or privately owned property, causing the value or utility of the property to be completely or partially lost. The constitutive elements of this crime are: first, the subject aspect—the subject of this crime is a general subject, any natural person who has reached the age of 16 and has criminal responsibility capacity. He Mou created the false impression that he had drowned and destroyed the borrowed vehicle, which is an act knowing that the property would be damaged, and is intentional. Therefore, the crime of intentional destruction of property may be established.

Article 275 of the Criminal Law stipulates that whoever intentionally destroys property shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, criminal detention, or a fine; if the amount involved is huge or there are other serious circumstances, the offender shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than seven years. The sentencing standard for the crime of intentional destruction of property provides that whoever intentionally destroys property, if the amount involved is relatively large or there are other serious circumstances, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, criminal detention, or a fine; if the amount involved is huge or there are other particularly serious circumstances, the offender shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than seven years. "Particularly serious circumstances" refers to destroying personal property, causing mental disorder in others; damaging production or business equipment and facilities, resulting in production suspension or business cessation, causing significant losses; or using extremely vile means of destruction.

Question Three

Has He not yet received insurance compensation, and does this constitute the crime of insurance fraud?

One of the elements constituting the crime of insurance fraud is: the policyholder or beneficiary intentionally causes the death, disability, or illness of the insured to defraud insurance money—so-called intentionally causing the death, disability, or illness of the insured to defraud insurance money refers to acts where the policyholder or beneficiary uses methods such as killing, injuring, abusing, abandoning, exploding, arson, poisoning, or other means to deliberately create a personal insurance accident, resulting in the death, injury, or illness of the insured, to defraud insurance money. If the crime of insurance fraud is constituted, according to Article 198 of the Criminal Law, anyone who engages in insurance fraud activities under any of the following circumstances, if the amount is relatively large, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than five years or criminal detention, and shall also be fined not less than 10,000 yuan but not more than 100,000 yuan; if the amount is huge or there are other serious circumstances, the offender shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than five years but not more than ten years, and shall also be fined not less than 20,000 yuan but not more than 200,000 yuan; if the amount is particularly huge or there are other particularly serious circumstances, the offender shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than ten years, and shall also be fined not less than 20,000 yuan but not more than 200,000 yuan or have property confiscated.

Regarding He's actions, lawyers have differing opinions. Some lawyers believe it constitutes the crime of insurance fraud (preparation for a crime), while others believe it constitutes the crime of insurance fraud (attempt); the core of the disagreement between these two views lies in "how to determine the commencement of the insurance fraud crime?" Lawyers who believe He constitutes the crime of insurance fraud (preparation for a crime) hold that the commencement of insurance fraud should begin when "the fraudster applies for compensation from the insurance company" (represented by Professor Zhang Mingkai). Therefore, He's actions merely created conditions for the crime, thus meeting the criteria for preparation for a crime. Lawyers who believe He constitutes the crime of insurance fraud (attempt) hold that the commencement of insurance fraud should begin when "the fraudster intentionally creates an insurance accident" (represented by traditional criminal law scholars). Therefore, He's actions in the actual crime failed due to objective reasons, thus meeting the criteria for attempted crime.

A family has been shattered like this. May these tragedies never happen again!