Criminal liability for illegal actions in bankruptcy. The composition of Article 195 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation as applied to the creation of fictitious ("friendly") accounts payable

Author(s):  
D. I. Petrov
Author(s):  
Sergey Kartashov

We consider objective essential elements of offence associated with malicious evasion from satisfaction of accounts payable. We emphasize that at the present time there is a polemic among scientists regarding the di-rect object of this crime and its subject, and there are also evaluative elements that characterize the objective side of this crime. Therefore, based on the analysis of Article 177 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and doctrinal points of view, we conclude that it should highlight the main direct object – economic relations associated with lending and an additional direct object – social relations associated with the sphere of justice. The subject of this crime will be money and securities, but not accounts payable. Thus in relation to the funds, the debtor is indebted in an amount exceeding two million two hundred fifty thousand rubles, while in relation to the securities the debt by the legislator in Article 177 of the Criminal Code is not specified. Regarding the elements of the objective side of the crime composition under consideration, we note that it is characterized as malicious evasion from satisfaction of accounts payable on a large scale or from redemption of securities after the entry into force of the relevant judicial act. Taking into account judicial practice and doctrinal points of view, we conclude that in order to uniformly interpret and apply Article 177 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is necessary to replace the word “maliciousness” with “intentional non-payment”, or give an official interpretation of the category of “maliciousness”, but without emphasizing the practice that follows certain (individual) court sentences. For example, maliciousness can be understood as “deliberate non-payment by a person of a debt, when he can fulfill his financial obligations, after one warning from the bailiff-executor about criminal liability under Article 177 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation”.


Author(s):  
Alexander V. Shesler ◽  
◽  

The article examines criminal acts, with which the law associates certain criminal legal consequences. The aim of the article is to substantiate the identification of various criminal acts and show their specificity in comparison with crimes. The research is based on the domestic criminal legislation, materials of judicial practice and the legislation of the Federal Republic of Germany. The research methods are: the method of comparative law, which allowed comparing the provisions about criminal offenses in the 1960 Criminal Code of the RSFSR and in the 1996 Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Code of Germany; the method of document analysis, which made it possible to analyze the judicial practice and proposals of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the introduction of provisions on criminal offences in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; the formal-logical method that made it possible to analyze the content of the norms of the Criminal Code about criminal acts. The article concludes that, in addition to crimes, criminal acts should include: a criminal offence, which entails criminal liability in the form of replacing punishment with a more severe one (fine, compulsory labor, correctional labor, restriction of freedom as the main type of punishment, forced labor) or criminal liability in the form of the cancellation of any type of probation (suspended sentence, parole, deferred sentence, deferred sentence for drug addicts); a minor act; socially dangerous behavior of persons who are not subjects of a crime due to their minor age or insanity; innocent infliction of harm. The article shows the specificity of a misdemeanour, consisting in the fact that this act is not socially dangerous, does not contain signs of a crime, violates the liability of the convicted person to be subject to limitations arising from the court-appointed punishment or type of probation (suspended sentence, parole, deferred sentence, deferred sentence for drug addicts). It is substantiated that a minor act should be referred to circumstances that exclude the criminality of an act due to the absence of public danger, an essential feature of a crime. It is argued that acts, provided for by the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, committed in a state of insanity and entailing compulsory medical measures, should not be subject to criminal law. The article criticizes the judicial practice of a broad interpretation of the commission of a crime by a group of persons, according to which it is not only a co-execution, but also any execution of the objective side of the crime by several persons, of which only one can be the perpetrator. It is argued that causing harm due to the non-compliance of the psychophysiological qualities of a person with the requirements of an extreme situation does not apply to innocent infliction of harm.


Author(s):  
Vаleria A. Terentieva ◽  

The systematic nature of criminal law forms the main features of the industry, namely: normativity, universalism, that is, the absence of casuistry and obligation. The strict consistency of both the entire industry and its individual institutions allows avoiding the redundancy of criminal law regulation, clearly determining the legal status of a person in conflict with the law. However, the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation do not always meet these requirements due to defects in legal technology, and, sometimes, gaps in regulation. In practice, the courts, in an effort to minimize the above defects, sometimes resort to excessive criminal law regulation; as an example, the article gives the ratio of the application of suspended sentence and placement in a special educational institution of a closed type. The article analyzes sentences to minors in which Art. 73 and Part 2 of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation were simultaneously applied in one sentence for the same act. For a comprehensive study, the article analyzed sentences to minors held in special educational institutions of a closed type for the period from 2014 to 2020, criminal statistics posted on the website of the Judicial Department of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, as well as various points of view of leading legal scholars. The research methods of static observation, analysis and synthesis, the system-structural method, as well as a number of factographic methods, were used. The study develops from the general to the specific, i.e., first, systematicity is analyzed as a property of the branch of criminal law and then as a property of a legal institution, namely, the release of minors from criminal liability. Consistency as a property of the institution of exemption from criminal punishment presupposes the impossibility of intersecting elements within one institution. Special attention is paid to the legal nature of suspended sentence as the most common punishment measure for minors, and its effectiveness. Then the cases of the simultaneous application of Art. 73 and Part 2 of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are analyzed. In the course of the study, the author examines the features of suspended sentence and placement in a special educational and educational institution of a closed type, compares these two forms of criminal liability, and highlights the differences. The conclusion is that the simultaneous placement in a special educational institution of a closed type and suspended sentence are a redundancy of criminal law regulation. The article raises the question of the need to improve the Criminal Code in terms of the development of placement in a special educational and educational institution of a closed type as a type of exemption from criminal punishment: the court is to be provided with the opportunity to control the juvenile offender’s correctional process.


2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-106
Author(s):  
V.V. Kusakin ◽  

The article is devoted to the analysis of Article 350 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for criminal liability for violation of the rules of driving or operating cars, the evolution of this article and the problems of sentencing under it are considered. One of the suggestions for improving this article is to change its sanction, which will eliminate the identified significant legal gap. The author conducted a comprehensive analysis of various aspects related to the criminal violation of traffic safety rules and the operation of military vehicles, and proposed the author's solution to the problematic aspects. The study used specific dialectical methods: comparative, hermeneutical, discursive, formal-legal, as well as some sociological methods: observation, methods of expert assessments and analysis. The provisions contained in the materials of the article can be used to improve the current criminal legislation and to develop explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in reviews of judicial practice.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 37-40
Author(s):  
Evgeniy V. Khromov ◽  

The issue of criminal legal assessment of the consequences of road accidents in the event of property damage is relevant. Disposition of Art. 168 of the Criminal Code provides for criminal liability for the destruction or damage of another’s property on a large scale, including through reckless handling of a source of increased danger. By virtue of h. 1 Article. 1079 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, vehicles are considered sources of increased danger.


Author(s):  
A. Ya. Asnis

The article deals with the criminological grounds and background of the adoption of the Federal law of April 23, 2018 № 99-FZ, which introduced criminal liability for abuse in the procurement of goods, works and services for state or municipal needs (Art. 2004 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and for bribery of employees of contract service, contract managers, members of the Commission on the implementation of the procurement of persons engaged in the acceptance of the delivered goods, performed works or rendered services, other authorized persons, representing interests of customer in the scope of the relevant procurement (Art. 2005 of the Criminal Code).The author formulates private rules of qualification of the corresponding crimes and differentiation of their structures from structures of adjacent crimes and administrative offenses. The necessity of changing the position of the legislator regarding generic and direct objects of these crimes, the adoption of a special resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to explain the practice of applying the relevant innovations.


Author(s):  
Dmitry Ovchinnikov

Currently, the economic sector of public relations is characterized by exceptional criminality. One of the main phenomena responsible for this is illegal money cashing. Almost every business entity considers it acceptable and even necessary to resort to various criminal schemes for obtaining unaccounted cash and tax evasion. The very type of this crime has actually become a thriving and profitable business, which consists in providing services for withdrawing funds from legal circulation. While the existing judicial and investigative practice in the issue of countering this phenomenon has not yet developed a clear answer about the need for appropriate qualifications. There are about a dozen articles of the criminal law in which law enforcement officers try to find the correct legal assessment, and at present, article 172 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation “Illegal banking activities” deserves special attention.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 79-84
Author(s):  
N. N. Korotkikh

The article analyzes some of the controversial, in the opinion of the author, recommendations of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 10 of 15.05.2018 «On the practice of the courts applying the provisions of paragraph 6 Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation». Lowering the category of crime always requires clear criteria by which the actions of the defendant could be qualified with a change in the gravity of the crime. Based on examples from judicial practice, the thesis is substantiated that “taking into account the factual circumstances of the case” and “the degree of its public danger” are evaluative e criteria and do not always allow to decide the validity of the application of part 6 article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The discrepancy between some of the recommendations contained in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is shown. It is concluded that it is impossible to exempt a person from criminal liability on the grounds specified in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 172-188
Author(s):  
Marina L. Prokhorova ◽  
◽  
Anastasiya K. Knyaz’kina ◽  
Valentina N. Kufleva

Introduction. The necessity of criminalising acts against the safety of maritime navigation in na- tional legislation is based on the requirement to comply with the international obligations. The relevance of the research is that the implementation of such criminalisation is not always carried out in a timely and adequate manner. Тhe author’s versions of the criminal law can be used by the legislator to further improve the Criminal Code. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The methodological basis of the study was a set of both general scientific and private scientific methods of cognition. In particular these included the analysis, synthesis, comparative, formal and the legal. Special attention was paid to the international legal standards, and the regulation of criminal liability for encroachments against security sea shipping. Results. The article analyses the regulations at the national level governing the crime of acts which infringe upon the safety of navigation at sea and in the river space. This is Art. 211 “Hijacking of an aircraft or water transport or railway rolling stock” and Art. 227 “Piracy” as provided for in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The article considers the provisions corresponding to these from international treaties, and investigates the problems of compliance in implementing norms of the Russian criminal law with the basic contractual provisions. At the same time, international acts are analysed in their latest and current version, taking into account all the changes and additions made to them. Discussion and Conclusion. As a result of the study, the authors come to the conclusion that it is necessary to make alterations to the national criminal legislation to bring it in line with the current international standards due to the absence of provisions in it regarding liability for crimes committed against sea vessels, as well as on board or against fixed platforms located on the continental shelf. At the same time, the authors propose specific additions to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In particular, these are on the inclusion of certain signs of corpus delicti relating to the number of qualifying items, and which also indicate the need to formulate specific criminal law norms providing for liability for crimes against sea vessels, as well as on board or against fixed platforms located on the continental shelf.


2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-165
Author(s):  
T. Yu. Popova

Article is devoted to search of author's determination of the criminal procedure status of the head of investigative body. Determination of the status is given in it is general legal sense, types of legal statuses, such as the general (constitutional), special (patrimonial), individual, the status of the foreigner and branch legal statuses are allocated. The discussion about a ratio of legal status and a legal status on the basis of which conclusions the author has divided concepts of legal and procedural status per se is given. Are carried to number of elements of legal status of the head of investigative body: the rights and duties provided by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and specified departmental standard legal by acts of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, SK of Russia and FSB of Russia; the criminal liability regulated by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the disciplinary responsibility provided by subordinate regulations for non-execution or inadequate execution of the procedural powers; procedural and administrative accountability of activity of the head of investigative body to the head of higher investigative body. Elements of the criminal procedure status of the designated participant of criminal trial, according to the author, are the rights and duties provided by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation; the accountability of activity of the head of investigative body to the head of higher investigative body regulated by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. The author has also mentioned a discussion about existence of criminal procedure responsibility of participants of criminal legal proceedings. In article the maintenance of each of elements of the status and justification of reference of each of them to this or that type of the status is opened. Proceeding from the considered structure, the concept of the criminal procedure status of the head of investigative body as the position of the head of the investigative body including his procedural laws, duties and accountability to the head of higher investigative body regulated only by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation is formulated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document