Insurance Fraud in Austria: Allegations, Penalties and Defence
Attorney, expert in criminal law & civil law, owner of the IBESICH law firm
Legal Notice/Disclaimer: The following information is intended for general guidance only and does not replace individual legal advice. For advice tailored to your specific situation, please consult a lawyer or another qualified legal professional.
- “Insurance fraud” is not a separate criminal offence in Austria. It is mainly prosecuted as fraud under §§ 146 to 148 of the Austrian Criminal Code (StGB) and as insurance abuse (Versicherungsmissbrauch) under § 151 StGB.
- Only intentional conduct is punishable. A mistake, a gap in memory or a dispute about the amount of the loss is not a criminal offence in itself.
- According to the case law of the Austrian Supreme Court (OGH), an incorrect claim report to the insurer can already amount to attempted fraud.
- The penalty depends above all on the amount of the loss: for smaller amounts, up to six months’ imprisonment or a fine; for a higher loss or forged documents, up to three years; and for a very high loss, up to ten years.
- Active repentance (tätige Reue), voluntarily abandoning the plan under § 151(2) StGB and diversion can be ways out of the proceedings. Each of them, however, has strict requirements.
- As a suspect, you have the right to remain silent and to consult defence counsel.
Table of contents
What counts as insurance fraud in Austria?
In everyday language, “insurance fraud” means any deception by which someone tries to obtain an insurance payment to which they are not entitled, or not in that amount. The Austrian Criminal Code, however, does not recognise this term as a separate offence.
Legally, it is primarily a matter of fraud in Austria under § 146 StGB. Fraud is committed by anyone who, by deceiving someone about facts, induces them to do something that causes financial loss to them or to another person. In addition, there must be the intent to enrich oneself or a third party unlawfully as a result.
In the case of insurance, the deception is typically a false claim report, an invented insured event or an exaggerated amount of loss. The act induced is the payout, and the loss is suffered by the insurer.
In addition, § 151 StGB establishes the offence of insurance abuse. It covers certain acts even before the insurer is deceived, such as deliberately damaging an insured item. Which provision applies in a specific case depends on how events unfolded.
Fraud or insurance abuse: the difference
Insurance abuse under § 151 StGB requires the intent to obtain an insurance payment for oneself or another person. It covers two groups of acts:
- destroying, damaging or removing an item insured against destruction, damage, loss or theft
- injuring oneself or another person or damaging their health, or allowing oneself to be injured or harmed
The OGH describes the nature of this provision as follows: preparatory acts ahead of fraud, which would otherwise not yet be punishable, are made punishable in their own right for reasons of legal policy (RS0094781).
§ 151 StGB no longer applies as soon as the act is punishable under the fraud provisions. This is expressly stated in the law. According to case law, this is already the case when the intended fraud has at least reached the stage of an attempt (RS0090485, RS0094800).
| Fraud (§§ 146 to 148 StGB) | Insurance abuse (§ 151 StGB) | |
|---|---|---|
| Core of the allegation | Deceiving the insurer about facts | Bringing about an insured event to an insured item or to a person’s body |
| Point in time | from the deception of the insurer, for example with the claim report | before any deception, with the damage or injury |
| Intent | unlawful enrichment through the conduct of the deceived party | obtaining an insurance payment |
| Penalty range | depending on the loss and the manner of commission, from up to six months to up to ten years | up to six months or a fine of up to 360 daily rates |
| Which provision applies? | Applies as soon as the insurer is deceived, even if nothing has been paid out yet. | Applies only if it does not come to deception, for example if the damage is never reported. |
| Exemption from punishment | active repentance (§ 167 StGB) or withdrawal from the attempt (§ 16 StGB) | voluntarily abandoning the plan under § 151(2) StGB |
Typical situations: cars, burglary, fire, prior damage and more
A report in the Ministry of the Interior’s magazine “Öffentliche Sicherheit” names staged road accidents, faked burglaries, inflated lists of losses after genuine burglaries and forged medical invoices in health insurance as common forms (BMI, Öffentliche Sicherheit 9-10/25).
The following case examples are fictitious and simplified. They show what matters in the legal assessment.
Car accidents and vandalism
In motor insurance, cases often involve staged or pre-arranged accidents, alleged vandalism damage or several older instances of damage reported as a single event. If an accident is only staged in order to obtain damages from the other party’s liability insurer, several participants may become suspects.
Fictitious example: the old scratch. After a parking incident, a driver also reports a scratch on the driver’s door that was already there before. An assessor notices different damage patterns. Under criminal law, what matters is whether she deliberately presented the prior damage as part of the new event or whether she herself did not know when the scratch had occurred. This can often be clarified with earlier photos, repair shop records and the exact wording of the claim report.
Burglary and household insurance
With burglary and household claims, the list of losses is often at the centre. If items are listed that never existed, or values that are clearly inflated, this can amount to deception. Even after a genuine burglary, a deliberately inflated list can be relevant under criminal law.
Fictitious example: the jewellery list. After a genuine break-in to their cellar storage room, a married couple also lists jewellery that was sold years earlier. The insurer asks for proof of purchase. Here it must be clarified who drew up the list, what each person knew and whether a mistake about the whereabouts of individual pieces is plausible. The burglary itself remains undisputed.
Anyone who simply invents a burglary when reporting to the police additionally risks an allegation under § 298 StGB for feigning a punishable act.
Fire
If a fire is set in order to obtain an insurance payment, the arson offences may apply in addition to fraud or insurance abuse. Under § 169 StGB, setting fire to one’s own property is punishable if this creates a danger to the life or limb of another person or to the property of third parties on a large scale. The penalty range is one to ten years’ imprisonment.
Arson and insurance fraud can be committed alongside each other. The OGH speaks of genuine concurrence of offences (RS0094524).
Prior damage and exaggerated amounts of loss
Often it is not the event that is invented, but the amount of the loss that is disputed. Typical examples are concealed prior damage, separate instances of damage combined into one or inflated invoices. The line to deception runs as follows: anyone who puts forward their own assessment of the loss is not deceiving. Anyone who deliberately misstates facts such as the date, cause or extent of the damage may be deceiving.
Accident, health and life insurance
In personal insurance, cases involve, for example, feigned injuries, statements about how an accident happened or health questions when the contract was concluded. Deliberate self-injury in order to obtain an insurance payment is expressly mentioned in § 151(1)(2) StGB.
With health insurance, a distinction must be made between statutory social insurance, such as the Austrian Health Insurance Fund (ÖGK), and private health insurance. Forged medical invoices can lead to investigations in both areas. The BMI report mentioned above describes such a case with losses for social insurance institutions and a private insurer.
Anyone who deceives in connection with a social insurance benefit, for example with someone else’s e-card or a forged invoice, may also be committing a criminal offence. Which provision then applies must be examined in the individual case.
Travel and mobile phone insurance
Travel, luggage and mobile phone insurance cases often concern alleged thefts or losses. The OGH has made clear that anyone who merely falsely claims a theft has not yet removed the item within the meaning of § 151 StGB (RS0094804). Such a claim to the insurer must, however, be examined as fraud.
When does a false statement become a criminal offence?
Deception, intent and intention to enrich
For fraud, several requirements must be met together. There must be deception about facts, an error caused by it, a disposition of assets by the insurer and a loss. In addition, the perpetrator must act with the intent to enrich themselves or a third party unlawfully.
Under § 5 StGB, a person already acts intentionally if they seriously consider it possible that the offence will be committed and accept this. A negligent false statement, by contrast, is not sufficient for fraud. A mistake when filling in a form, a wrongly remembered date of purchase or an unclear wording is therefore not automatically punishable.
Enrichment is “unlawful” if there is no entitlement to the payment. If someone genuinely believes that they are entitled to the payment claimed, the intent to enrich may be lacking. This also applies if the insurer later rightly rejects the claim.
When is there an attempt?
An attempt is also punishable (§ 15 StGB). The OGH has held the following (RS0090410):
- Anyone who merely fakes damage and describes it falsely to the police is not yet punishable for insurance fraud as long as they have not reported anything to the insurer. Legally, this only counts as preparation.
- As soon as the false damage is reported to the insurer, however, there is already attempted fraud.
For those affected, this means that the fact that the insurer has not yet paid anything does not rule out criminal liability. Conversely, a false report to the police can have consequences of its own, for example under § 298 StGB.
Repair shops, witnesses and helpers
Under § 12 StGB, the offence is not committed only by the direct perpetrator. Anyone who induces another person to commit it or otherwise contributes to it is also punishable. Austrian law thus generally treats incitement and aiding as forms of perpetration.
In insurance cases, people who have not claimed any payment themselves can therefore also become involved in the proceedings: the second driver in a staged accident, a witness who confirms a pre-arranged version, or a repair shop that knowingly issues an inflated invoice.
Fictitious example: the repair shop invoice. At a customer’s request, the owner of a repair shop issues an invoice for work that was never carried out. The customer submits it to their comprehensive motor insurer. For both, it must be examined what each of them knew and intended. If a false or falsified document or other false evidence is used for the deception, § 147(1)(1) StGB provides for a higher penalty range, regardless of the amount of the loss.
What are the penalties for insurance fraud?
The penalty range depends on which provision has been fulfilled. In the case of fraud, the decisive factors are above all the amount of the loss, the use of false evidence and whether the offence was committed on a commercial basis.
| Legal basis | Requirement | Penalty range |
|---|---|---|
| § 146 StGB | Fraud without aggravating circumstances | Imprisonment of up to six months or a fine of up to 360 daily rates |
| § 147(1)(1) StGB | Fraud using a false or falsified document, false or falsified data or other such evidence | Imprisonment of up to three years |
| § 147(2) StGB | Loss of more than EUR 5,000 | Imprisonment of up to three years |
| § 147(2a) StGB | Offence under para. 1 no. 1 as a member of a criminal association | Six months to five years’ imprisonment |
| § 147(3) StGB | Loss of more than EUR 300,000 | One to ten years’ imprisonment |
| § 148 StGB | Commercial fraud | Up to three years; for commercial aggravated fraud under § 147(1) to (2), six months to five years |
| § 151 StGB | Insurance abuse where there is no fraud | Imprisonment of up to six months or a fine of up to 360 daily rates |
Sources: § 146, § 147, § 148 and § 151 StGB, each RIS, version of 5 October 2026.
The table only shows the statutory range. The penalty imposed in an individual case depends on the degree of guilt and on mitigating and aggravating factors. Whether a sentence is suspended on probation cannot be derived from the table.
How high is a fine? In Austria, fines are assessed in daily rates (§ 19 StGB). The number of daily rates depends on the degree of guilt. The amount of a daily rate depends on personal circumstances and financial capacity and is between EUR 4 and EUR 5,000. If the fine cannot be collected, a substitute custodial sentence is imposed instead, with one day corresponding to two daily rates.
Criminal record and expungement. A final conviction is entered in the criminal record (§ 2 Criminal Records Act). It does not remain there forever: after a single conviction to imprisonment of no more than one year or only to a fine, it is expunged after five years (§ 3 Expungement Act). Diversion is not a conviction and therefore does not lead to a criminal record.
Other offences may be added to fraud, such as forgery of documents under § 223 StGB, arson or feigning a criminal offence. In addition, there are the civil-law consequences vis-à-vis the insurer.
How a suspicion of insurance fraud arises
It is usually the insurer that first becomes suspicious. It checks claim reports for plausibility, requests supporting documents, commissions experts or has the case handled by its own investigators. According to the BMI report, insurers work closely with the police and also use technical tools to detect manipulated photos and documents.
Typical triggers are contradictions between the account given and the damage pattern, missing or conspicuous supporting documents, several claims within a short time or an unusual timing in relation to when the contract was concluded. Such a trigger is a reason for follow-up questions, but not yet evidence.
If the insurer considers the suspicion to be well-founded, it can report the matter to the police or the public prosecutor’s office. Under § 80 StPO, anyone who learns of a criminal offence is entitled to do so. The criminal police and the public prosecutor’s office then conduct the investigation proceedings. They can question witnesses, obtain documents and question the suspect.
Fraud and insurance abuse are prosecuted ex officio. The criminal police and the public prosecutor’s office must investigate an initial suspicion as soon as they learn of it (§ 2 StPO). If the insurer withdraws its report, the proceedings therefore do not end automatically.
For those affected, criminal proceedings often begin with a summons to be questioned as a suspect. Before the questioning begins, you must be told which offence you are suspected of. You must be informed that you may comment or refuse to make a statement, and that your statement can also be used as evidence against you (§ 164 StPO).
Dispute with the insurer or criminal offence?
Many conflicts with insurers are purely disputes about coverage. The insurer relies on an exclusion, disputes the amount of the loss or alleges a breach of contractual obligations. Initially, this is a question of civil law.
A criminal allegation requires more: deliberate deception about facts with the intent to enrich. The two levels are often mixed up, especially when the insurer refuses payment and reports the matter to the police at the same time.
| Coverage dispute (civil law) | Criminal allegation |
|---|---|
| different assessment of a loss | deliberately false statements about cause, time or extent |
| dispute about coverage or exclusions | invented or deliberately caused insured event |
| inadvertently incomplete information | deliberately concealed prior damage in order to receive more |
| invoice whose amount is disputed | forged or sham invoice |
| resolved before the civil court or an arbitration body | resolved in the investigation proceedings and before the criminal court |
The boundaries are fluid. A refusal to pay does not prove fraud. Conversely, discontinued criminal proceedings do not automatically mean that the insurer has to pay.
Withdrawal, making good the loss and diversion
Anyone who realises that a claim report was false often wonders whether a correction or repayment can still help. Austrian law provides several routes for this. They have different requirements and are time-critical.
Voluntarily abandoning insurance abuse. Under § 151(2) StGB, a person is not punished for insurance abuse if they voluntarily abandon further pursuit of their plan. This must happen before the insurance payment has been made and before an authority responsible for criminal prosecution has learned of their culpability.
Withdrawal from an attempt. If fraud has only been attempted, for example because no payment has yet been made, withdrawal under § 16 StGB can lead to exemption from punishment. The requirement is that the perpetrator voluntarily abandons the execution or prevents the result.
Active repentance after completed fraud. If the insurer has already paid, active repentance under § 167 StGB may be considered. It requires that the entire loss resulting from the offence is made good or that the perpetrator contractually undertakes to do so. This must happen before the authority has learned of their culpability. It may also happen at the insurer’s urging, as long as the perpetrator is not forced to do so. Another option is making good the loss in the course of self-reporting by depositing the amount with the authority.
According to § 151(3) StGB, “authority” means the criminal prosecution authorities and the public security bodies, not the insurer. According to the wording, the fact that the insurer has already become suspicious therefore does not yet rule out active repentance. If the police or the public prosecutor’s office have already learned of the culpability, this route is generally closed.
Diversion. If the facts have been sufficiently clarified and discontinuation is not an option, the public prosecutor’s office can refrain from prosecution under § 198 StPO. One of the requirements is that the offence carries a penalty of no more than five years’ imprisonment and that the guilt would not be regarded as serious. Diversion is therefore ruled out for a loss of more than EUR 300,000.
Possible measures include payment of a sum of money, community service, a probationary period or victim-offender mediation. In the case of a payment, the amount may not exceed the equivalent of a fine of 180 daily rates plus the costs of the proceedings (§ 200 StPO). As a rule, the loss must also be made good within a period of no more than six months.
Diversion is not a conviction. However, there is no legal right to it. Whether it is realistic in a specific case depends on the evidence, the amount of the loss, the person’s previous record and their willingness to make good the loss.
Civil-law consequences: release from liability, repayment claims, termination
In addition to the criminal proceedings, an attempted deception has consequences for the insurance contract. These consequences arise regardless of whether there is a conviction.
Release from liability. After the insured event, the policyholder must provide the insurer with the information required to establish the insured event and the obligation to pay (§ 34 VersVG). If they intentionally breach such contractual obligations in order to influence the obligation to pay, the insurer may be released from liability under § 6(3) VersVG, insofar as the contract provides for this. Anyone who causes the insured event intentionally or through gross negligence loses the claim in property and casualty insurance under § 61 VersVG.
Withdrawal and rescission. False statements when concluding the contract, for example about previous illnesses or earlier claims, can lead to the insurer withdrawing from the contract under § 16 VersVG. In the case of fraudulent misrepresentation, the right to rescind the contract remains reserved (§ 22 VersVG).
Repayment claims. If the insurer has paid without a legal basis, it can demand repayment. The basis is in particular the rule on payment of a debt not owed in § 1431 ABGB. A repayment can at the same time be significant for active repentance or diversion. It should therefore not be agreed without consulting your defence counsel.
Termination. For certain lines of insurance, the VersVG gives both parties a right of termination after an insured event, for example § 96 VersVG in fire insurance and § 158 VersVG in liability insurance. Which termination rights exist under a specific contract follows from the law and the insurance terms and conditions.
How a lawyer helps with an allegation of insurance fraud
An allegation of insurance fraud often involves two sets of proceedings at once: the criminal proceedings and the dispute with the insurer. A lawyer can bring order to both levels and coordinate them.
Access to the file and assessment of the allegation. The first question is what exactly is being alleged. As a suspect, you have the right to access the case file (§ 51 StPO). Only this shows which expert opinions, witness statements or documents the suspicion is based on and which provision is at issue.
Rights of the suspect and questioning. You may comment on the allegation or refuse to make a statement and consult defence counsel (§ 49 StPO). Whether and when a statement makes sense can usually only be assessed once the file is known. Defence counsel can also be present during the questioning.
Communication with the insurer. Towards the insurer there are contractual duties to provide information, whereas in criminal proceedings there is the right to remain silent. What you write to the insurer may later end up in the criminal file. Letters to the insurer should therefore be coordinated with your defence counsel.
Written statement and evidence. Exculpatory documents such as photos, invoices, receipts or messages can make the sequence of events comprehensible. The suspect can apply for evidence to be taken. A written statement can help to clear up misunderstandings if it is based on verified facts.
Diversion and making good the loss. If diversion or active repentance may be an option, defence counsel examines the requirements and the right timing. Making good the loss only has an effect under certain conditions, in the case of active repentance, for example, only before the authority has knowledge. The form and timing should therefore be planned.
Defending against repayment claims. If the insurer demands money back or refuses payment altogether, it must be examined whether and to what extent this claim is justified. Part of the loss may actually have occurred. Settlement talks are also possible.
When early advice makes sense. Advice is particularly useful if you have received a summons for questioning, if the insurer accuses you of fraud or if you are considering correcting a claim report or paying money back. In these situations, timing and wording often determine the further options. A particular outcome cannot be promised.
What to do in case of suspicion or a summons
If you receive a summons or the insurer accuses you of fraud, these steps will help you keep track:
- Keep the summons and letters. Note the authority, the case number, the date and your role (suspect or witness).
- Do not make a statement unprepared. As a suspect, you may refuse to make a statement. Take the opportunity to seek advice beforehand.
- Secure documents. Keep the claim report, photos, invoices, expert reports and correspondence with the insurer unchanged.
- Prepare a chronology. For your defence, record when what happened and who made which statements.
- Coordinate communication. Do not respond to the insurer’s allegations spontaneously, but only after coordination.
- Have your options examined. Clarify early whether discontinuation, active repentance or diversion may be considered.
| What to do | What to avoid |
|---|---|
| take the summons date seriously and request a postponement in good time if necessary | ignoring the summons |
| keep existing documents complete and unchanged | creating, altering or destroying supporting documents after the fact |
| exercise your right to a defence | contacting other participants or witnesses to align statements |
| coordinate repayments with your defence counsel | signing acknowledgements of debt or guilt hastily |
| ask when something is unclear instead of guessing | giving details from memory that you are not sure about |
General questions about questioning, diversion and house searches are also answered in the overview of criminal law.
Have you received a summons, or is your insurer accusing you of fraud? For an initial consultation, you can put together the summons, the claim report and your correspondence with the insurer. The consultation can then clarify how the allegation should be assessed and which next steps make sense in your situation.
Frequently Asked Questions About Insurance Fraud
Is insurance fraud a criminal offence in Austria?
Yes. There is no separate offence with this name. Insurance fraud is, however, punishable as fraud under §§ 146 to 148 StGB. Certain preparatory acts, such as deliberately damaging an insured item, are also punishable in their own right as insurance abuse under § 151 StGB.
How high is the fine for insurance fraud?
There is no fixed amount. For simple fraud and for insurance abuse, the law provides for fines of up to 360 daily rates. Depending on personal circumstances and financial capacity, one daily rate is between EUR 4 and EUR 5,000. For aggravated fraud, for example with a loss of more than EUR 5,000, the law provides for imprisonment of up to three years.
Is a false claim report already punishable if the insurer does not pay?
Yes, that is possible. According to the case law of the OGH, an incorrect claim report to the insurer is already attempted fraud. The attempt is punishable. However, anyone who voluntarily withdraws before the insurer pays may escape punishment under the conditions of § 16 StGB.
Is it a criminal offence to help with or incite insurance fraud?
Yes. Under § 12 StGB, the offence is committed not only by the direct perpetrator but also by anyone who induces another person to commit it or otherwise contributes to it. This can concern, for example, people involved in an accident, witnesses or repair shops. The requirement is always corresponding intent on the part of the person concerned.
Is fraud against a health insurance fund also insurance fraud?
In everyday language, yes. Legally, a distinction must be made between private health insurance and statutory social insurance. In both areas, deception, for example with forged medical invoices, can be prosecuted as fraud.
Can the insurer report me to the police?
Yes. Under § 80 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO), anyone who learns of a criminal offence is entitled to report it. A report, however, is not evidence. Whether there is a suspicion is examined by the criminal police and the public prosecutor’s office in the investigation proceedings.
Will I have a criminal record after insurance fraud?
Only in the case of a final conviction. It is entered in the criminal record and expunged after a statutory period. For a single conviction to imprisonment of no more than one year or to a fine, the expungement period is five years. Diversion is not a conviction.
When does insurance fraud become time-barred?
The limitation period depends on the statutory penalty (§ 57 StGB). Simple fraud and insurance abuse carry a maximum of six months and become time-barred after one year. For aggravated and commercial fraud the period is five years, and for a loss of more than EUR 300,000 it is ten years. The period starts as soon as the punishable conduct has ended. Under the conditions of § 58 StGB it is extended, for example for the duration of criminal proceedings from the first questioning as a suspect.
Does it help to pay the money back to the insurer?
It can help, but it does not work automatically. Exemption from punishment through active repentance requires that the entire loss is made good before the police or the public prosecutor’s office learn of the culpability. Later on, making good the loss can be important for diversion or as a mitigating factor. You should agree the timing and form with your defence counsel.
Do I have to make a statement to the police?
Not as a suspect. You may comment on the allegation or refuse to make a statement and consult defence counsel. Remaining silent is not an admission of guilt. You should nevertheless not simply ignore a summons, but clarify the situation beforehand.
When does it make sense to involve a lawyer?
Above all when you are summoned as a suspect, when the insurer accuses you of fraud in writing, or when you want to correct a claim report or pay money back. As a suspect, you have the right to choose defence counsel and to have them present at your questioning (§ 49 StPO). A consultation clarifies how the allegation should be assessed. It cannot promise a particular outcome.
Sources
Austrian Criminal Code (StGB)
- § 5 StGB – Intent
- § 12 StGB – Treatment of all participants as perpetrators
- § 15 StGB – Punishability of attempt
- § 16 StGB – Withdrawal from attempt
- § 19 StGB – Fines
- § 57 StGB – Limitation of criminal liability
- § 58 StGB – Extension of the limitation period
- § 146 StGB – Fraud
- § 147 StGB – Aggravated fraud
- § 148 StGB – Commercial fraud
- § 151 StGB – Insurance abuse
- § 167 StGB – Active repentance
- § 169 StGB – Arson
- § 223 StGB – Forgery of documents
- § 298 StGB – Feigning a punishable act
Criminal procedure and criminal records
- § 2 StPO – Ex officio prosecution
- § 49 StPO – Rights of the suspect
- § 51 StPO – Access to the case file
- § 80 StPO – Right to report and to detain
- § 164 StPO – Questioning of the suspect
- § 198 StPO – Diversion, general provisions
- § 200 StPO – Payment of a sum of money
- § 2 Criminal Records Act 1968 (Strafregistergesetz) – Entry in the criminal record
- § 3 Expungement Act 1972 (Tilgungsgesetz) – Expungement period for a single conviction
Insurance contract law and civil law
- § 6 Insurance Contract Act (VersVG) – Breach of contractual obligations
- § 16 VersVG – Duty of disclosure when concluding the contract
- § 22 VersVG – Rescission for fraudulent misrepresentation
- § 34 VersVG – Duty to provide information after the insured event
- § 61 VersVG – Causing the insured event
- § 96 VersVG – Termination after the insured event (fire insurance)
- § 158 VersVG – Termination after the insured event (liability insurance)
- § 1431 Austrian Civil Code (ABGB) – Payment of a debt not owed
Case law (RIS-Justiz)
- OGH, RS0090410 – Claim report as attempted fraud
- OGH, RS0090485 – No § 151 StGB once fraud has reached the attempt stage
- OGH, RS0094800 – Subsidiarity of § 151 StGB
- OGH, RS0094781 – Nature of insurance abuse
- OGH, RS0094804 – Removing the insured item
- OGH, RS0094524 – Arson and insurance fraud
Information from public authorities
Find more reviews on our Google Business Profile
Get in Touch
You can reach us by phone, email, or via our contact form.
IBESICH
Josefstädter Straße 11/1/16
1080 Wien
MO-FR: 9 am to 6 pm
You are currently viewing a placeholder content from Google Maps. To access the actual content, click the button below. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More Information
You need to load content from reCAPTCHA to submit the form. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationNews from the firm and legal updates in Austria.
