In insurance sales, any behavior of "commission rebate," "gift rebate," or "promise of additional benefits" is illegal. Recently, the Beijing Financial Court tried a dispute case caused by a salesperson's violation of promises. An insurance salesperson was not only sentenced to a refund of commission for illegal sales, but also had to compensate the insurance company for losses. In February and March 2023, Ruan signed two insurance contracts with Jin, a salesperson from an insurance company. Later, Jin obtained high commissions, business rewards, allowances, and other benefits from two insurance policies. During the process of signing two insurance contracts, Jin made a promise to Ruan to give away gold bars without authorization. Later, Ruan did not receive the gold bars and was unable to contact Jin. Therefore, he negotiated with the insurance company to terminate the two insurance contracts mentioned above. Based on the salesperson's violation, the insurance company terminated the two insurance contracts and refunded all premiums for the two policies to Ruan. Due to Jin's illegal behavior during the sales process, the insurance company has sued him to the court, requesting that Jin be ordered to return the commissions, rewards, and allowances already received, and compensate the company for the corresponding economic losses. The first instance court ruled that Jin should compensate for the above-mentioned commission and other losses. Jin was dissatisfied and appealed to the Beijing Financial Court. After trial, the Beijing Financial Court believes that according to the provisions of the Insurance Agency Contract in this case, if the insured Ruan terminates the insurance contract due to Jin's fault, Jin should fully refund the agency fees (commissions), rewards, and allowances already paid by a certain insurance company; In addition, Jin should also be liable for compensation to the insurance company within the scope of actual losses suffered by the insurance company, the difference between premiums and cash value, and legal fees. The presiding judge stated that in this case, Jin's behavior of "promising returns and giving gold bars" has directly violated the prohibitive provision of Article 131 (4) of the Insurance Law of China, which prohibits giving benefits beyond those stipulated in the insurance contract. Such commitments are often accompanied by misleading sales, distorting the original intention of insurance products to diversify risks, exaggerating returns, concealing risks, and easily causing disputes and damaging industry reputation. This case also reminds consumers not to believe in sales inducements due to small profits, and to purchase insurance rationally based on the product itself; At the same time, it also warns sales personnel that they must strictly abide by the bottom line of compliance, and any violations will inevitably bear legal consequences. (New Society)