摘要： 保险诈骗共同犯罪的认定在司法实践中问题丛生。在很多案件中，无身份者往往对于制造保险事故具有十分重要的作用。如果对有身份者和无身份者分别定罪，则会导致身份、作用的相互渗透性在定罪量刑过程中被忽略。《刑法》第198条第4款仅是提示性规定，并非对共同犯罪一般规定的修改。这一认识维护了刑法体系性、协调性，且不影响其他金融诈骗犯罪的共同犯罪的判断，更避免了司法者在罪名判断上陷于困惑。“对结果之原因的支配 "理论把握了身份犯的实质，有益于解决正犯中的判断及认定问题。在保险诈骗犯罪中，无身份者如果仅仅实施了“虚构事实"的行为，则只能构成保险诈骗罪的帮助犯。

关键词: 保险诈骗, 共犯, 身份, 提示性规定

Abstract: There，many problems in judicial practice of joint crime of insurance fraud in practice. In many cases,the actor without status always took a key role in causing an insurance acccident. If to convict the actor with status and the actor without status respectively, it maybe lead to the condition that the interaction of the status and position would be neglected. The provision of the fourth section of Article 198 of the Criminal Law of PRC is just suggestive, and does not amend the general provision of joint crime. Such a conclusion affrims the system of penal law, and won’t affect the judgment of joint crimes of other financial fraud.

Key words: Insurance Fraud, Joint Crime, Status, Suggestive Provision