In the art of book graphics, the first after the flyleaf. book graphics

We are moving towards open theft. Here everything is quite simple and understandable for us, taking into account the fact that we discussed the secret with you, and the open is everything exactly the opposite. When we talked about the criterion of secrecy, I told you about the objective and subjective components. A person in case of secret theft must consider that he performs these actions secretly and objectively these actions must be secret: there are no persons who observe the process of seizure, correctly understand the nature of the seizure, are for this person outsiders and reveal themselves. If we have only a subjective criterion, and the objective one is actually absent: someone observes the process of withdrawal, then we give priority to the subjective criterion, but again, based on general principles rationality. Not when he says: I thought that no one sees me, despite the fact that 25 people shouted to him: where did you go, put things back! And when the situation really allowed him to believe that he could not notice that he was being watched and understood the nature of his actions. Everything is exactly the opposite for robbery. Robbery is also characterized by an objective criterion and a subjective criterion.

Objective criterion assumes that there are persons who observe the process of seizure, understand the nature of the actions performed, and are outsiders for the guilty person.

Subjective criterion assumes that these outsiders are in the field of vision of the perpetrator, he understands that he is carrying out the seizure in the presence of some other persons. Just like any classical form embezzlement - a material composition, ended from the moment when a person has the opportunity to dispose of the stolen property, thus the opportunity to dispose of this property as one's own is at the same time causing property damage to the victim, because he loses the opportunity to dispose of this property.

Robbery can be violent or non-violent. By general rule, robbery is simply open theft, which has no violent content. The most common situation is theft by a jerk, when they suddenly snatch handbags from their hands, tear off hats from their heads, snatch some valuable things from pockets, hands, etc. Here the question arises related to what should be observed and realized by the victim or any other person in which the property is seized? In the scientific literature, there is a point of view what theft is by a jerk, when it occurs from behind a corner, in a dark alley, using special means, when he did not just rip off his hat from his head, but used a stick, a hook. In fact, the person who seizes the property is not visible to the victim. Is it possible in this case to say that this is an open theft, or should we say that the process of seizure is not observed and this is a secret theft? However, practice and scientific literature came to a more or less unanimous opinion and proceed from the fact that in this situation this theft is open, because it is necessary that the victim or another person who was present during the seizure process did not see how the property was seized and who seized it, but in principle realized that the property is out of his sphere of dominion or another person who is the owner of this property. Yes, he does not see who is tearing off his hat, but he understands that he had a hat on his head, but now it is not. He understands that thanks to someone this happened. He does not see the process, but he feels this process of loss of property. And therefore, even this kind of theft is still recognized as open. Now the question is about the use of violence. In paragraph "d" part 2 of Art. 161 provides for a qualifying sign with the use of violence not life-threatening health. Violence dangerous to health, with what kind of violence does it begin? From violence that can cause minor bodily harm. Everything that is not capable of causing even slight harm to health is violence that is not dangerous either to life or to health. If consequences have occurred or could have occurred, which are characterized by a lesser degree of danger than causing slight harm to health - these are beatings and causing physical pain, which in itself did not entail any adverse consequences for the physical component, for the physiology of the body, but at the same time caused physical pain or restricted freedom: hands were tied or handcuffed to a radiator. The maximum that will be a bruise from handcuffs. They tied him up, tied him to a chair, entered the apartment, locked him in some room - they limited the freedom of this person. They hit, but in such a way that the consequences of this blow in the form of light harm did not occur. They pulled sharply, the chain was torn from the neck. When using this kind of violence that is not dangerous to life and health, it must be taken into account that this qualifying sign can be imputed only when the intent of the person covered the infliction of some kind of physical pain and the use of this kind of violence. If the chain is small and thin, the girls know that if they hurt, they can lose and not pay attention. Why do I say girls, because boys usually wear something more dense, which requires some effort to tear off the neck. And women have chains and those that unfasten by themselves: they combed it, pulled the comb, lost it, didn’t notice. In such a situation, when a person believes that by pulling such a chain, he comes up from behind and tries to pull it off or take it off. If he believes that this will not cause physical pain, does not assume that his actions can lead to such consequences for the victim, then we cannot impute this sign. Suddenly he pulled, I thought it would break, but it turned out to be unexpectedly strong, because she had lost her daughter many times, so dad soldered this chain right on his daughter and she could not unfasten it. He, of course, did not know about this and could not know, and by committing such actions, he inflicts physical pain, which was not covered by his intent. Or one more example: at one time, mink hats were worn with elastic bands so that they would not fall off the head, now the elderly also sometimes practice. He approached, grabbed his hat, thought that he would tear it off and run away, but it turned out that the hat with an elastic band and an elastic band caused physical pain - he didn’t know, didn’t assume, he wasn’t covered by intent, so we can’t impute this sign in such a situation. If the violence actually resulted in consequences ranging from slight bodily harm, then we cannot speak of robbery, we can only speak of robbery. In relation to these signs of violence that is dangerous and not dangerous to life and health, the PP points to situations where there was no direct physical contact with the body of the victim, but there was a physical impact on the body, on the health of the victim. What am I talking about? About the use of various types of drugs, medical preparations, potent drugs, etc. In the case when such drugs are used, an illusion can be created that the person is acting in secret: he added sleeping pills, the victim fell asleep, after the victim fell asleep, he confiscated his property. In principle, it seems like the victim does not observe the process of seizure of property, but taking into account the fact that he introduced the victim into such a state initially in order to make it easier for himself to commit a crime, we can no longer consider this. Depending on the effect of this drug, whether it will be dangerous or not for life and health, it will be either robbery or robbery. If the drug did not cause health effects and could not cause health consequences, in the form of mild harm and more dangerous, then we cannot say that this is robbery, but we are saying that this is robbery, taking robbery according to paragraph “d » Part 2 Art. 161. If the drug could potentially cause such consequences or actually caused such consequences, then we say that it is robbery, regardless of whether there were any consequences for the body or not, it is enough that the drug itself was.

Subject - general, a person who has reached the age of 14. We focus on what is worth part 2 of Art. 20 of the Criminal Code, in relation to the qualifying features of Art. 161, we have already analyzed everything else for theft, we have just analyzed the specific sign for paragraph “d”. Another point that is not necessary to discuss when describing robbery is the moment of distinguishing between robbery and robbery on the one hand and extortion on the other. Shall we stop now? Let's go ahead and look at all this in relation to robbery.

Article 162

We are reviewing the robbery. Robbery suggests in Art. 162 in accordance with the disposition - an attack for the purpose of stealing someone else's property, which is committed either with the use of violence dangerous to life and health, or with the threat of such violence. It roars robbery and robbery: on the one hand, the presence of a person who observes the process of seizure of property, on the other hand, it also roars the use of violence, if we are talking about paragraph “d” of part 2 of Art. 161 - what we have just considered, violence or the threat of violence. But they distinguish the nature of the violence that is used. If violence is a qualifying feature in robbery, then here it is a feature that constructs the corpus delicti, since the attack is part of the objective side. In the absence of this attack, there can be no robbery.

objective side robbery consists of two independent parts - this is the use of violence, the very attack that is indicated in the disposition and theft. From the general part I think you remember that robbery is a truncated corpus delicti And the moment of the legal end was moved to the moment of the beginning of the attack, regardless of whether the attack actually led to any consequences and whether or not the seizure of property was successful or not. If the theft - the second component was realized - it was possible to take possession of the property, then this does not take the seizure of property beyond the limits of robbery - it is still robbery. If it was not possible to take possession of the property, but violence was used for the purpose of taking possession, this is quite enough to also say that a complete robbery took place. This is a situation of truncated compositions, where the moment of legal termination and the moment of actual termination do not coincide.

Attack. What is an attack, in relation to the composition of robbery? Since we are talking about an attack and the use of violence that is dangerous to life and health, or a threat to use such violence, then how is the question of the object resolved? If the objective side includes the use of violence - two-objective crime - an infringement on property and an infringement on a person. The ratio of property is the main object, the additional and obligatory object is life or health. Despite the fact that causing death goes beyond robbery, nevertheless, we must talk about an additional object, both about life and health, because there can be a threat of violence, up to a threat of causing death, and this is already an encroachment on life.

Attack question. With regard to the attack in the current PP on theft, robbery and robbery, the understanding of the attack follows directly, but does not consider this concept. But in relation to the PP on responsibility for banditry of 1997, since, for banditry, an attack is a goal that is one of the signs that characterize the objective side, the concept of an attack is revealed.

under attack understand actions that are aimed at achieving a criminal result by using violence or creating a real threat of immediate use of violence. When the use of violence or the immediate threat of violence is a means to an end. in this case, a means for taking possession of property.

What does violence dangerous to life and health mean? This is violence that can cause mild, moderate and severe harm to health. Violence that can lead to death is also included in the description of the attack, but the consequences in the form of death go beyond robbery.

As for the threat of violence, the threat can be any and qualifies as any violence under Part 1 of Art. 162. In fact, this is part of the implementation of the objective side of a simple composition. It may be a threat of causing minor harm to health, moderate, grievous harm, the threat of murder, the threat of kidnapping, and so on. As a rule, it is limited to the threat of causing violence of varying severity. The threat may or may not be specific., but it must be specific enough to distinguish between life-threatening and health-threatening violence or non-dangerous violence. If he threatens with violence, it is not clear what kind, he shook his fist, then this is violence that is not dangerous, we cannot be specific enough to consider that dangerous violence will be used in this situation. If we are talking about what threatens with a weapon - that threatens with violence dangerous to life and health, regardless of whether he actually intends to use this weapon or not. The use of violence and the infliction of harm to health are two different categories, therefore, the use of violence may not entail consequences in the form of light, moderate and severe harm to health or death. He was lucky: violence was used, and he turned out to be extremely strong, having been hit on the head three times, he only earned a bump - this in no way changes the nature of the actions against him to less dangerous ones. If the head is beaten three times, then this is violence that is dangerous to life and health, if in fact no harm has occurred, then this is the happiness of the victim, but in no way changes the qualification corpus delicti. If violence entailed the onset of consequences, then - depending on what consequences we are talking about - the qualifications will be different. If slight harm to health or moderate harm to health is caused, this is Part 1 of Art. 162. If we are talking about infliction of grievous bodily harm, then this is part 1, 2 or 3, if these are qualifying signs. If this is violence in such a format that caused serious harm to health, then this is paragraph “c” of Part 4 of Art. 162. Further, violence, which would have entailed more dangerous consequences, is no longer covered by the offense of robbery, it is a serious bodily injury, resulting in death and intentional infliction of death. Here attention! The resolution of the Plenum says that in addition to the fact that we must additionally qualify these actions under Part 4 of Art. 111 or under Article 105, depending on the form of guilt the person had in relation to the relevant article. We must, in relation to robbery, qualify through paragraph “c” of Part 4 of Art. 162. In fact, it turns out that a person who caused grievous bodily harm, negligently resulting in death while committing robbery, is liable for robbery, causing grievous bodily harm and again for causing grievous bodily harm, negligently causing death. In fact, we take into account twice this grievous bodily harm, just as in the case of intentional infliction of death, robbery - causing grievous bodily harm and murder associated with robbery. Qualification, somewhat contrary to the general idea of ​​the rules of qualification. Here, two times serious harm is taken into account, here the consequences are less serious and more serious, despite the fact that the implementation of the same intent. If we remove the element of robbery and leave grievous harm and murder, then there can be no such qualification if the intent was aimed at causing death. But in this situation, the Armed Forces allow such qualification. Many authors criticize this position and I tend to agree that the position of the VS is not ideal, especially if we are talking about the intentional infliction of death. We impute grievous bodily harm during robbery and we impute murder associated with robbery - twice and there, and there we take into account these signs. But the position of the Armed Forces is conditioned by the following: the consequences that go beyond the limits of robbery, in any case, require additional qualification, the Armed Forces do not offer us anything new and extreme, but to refuse qualification after paragraph “c” of part 4, according to the Armed Forces, this means it would be unjustified to mitigate the very liability for robbery, because the robbery took place not just with the threat of violence, but with the use of violence quite serious, which entailed consequences that went beyond the scope of robbery and therefore, paragraph "c" part 4 in such a qualification , which in the first, which in the second case reflects the danger of the robbery itself, and the additional qualification in the aggregate reflects those consequences that are not covered by the composition of the robbery. This is not an unequivocal reason to recognize this kind of qualification as flawless and absolutely correct, but it justifies the position of the Supreme Court and in this case we proceed from what the Plenum recommended to us like this. Let's remember and we will proceed from this.

The legislative definition of theft of property was formulated and included in the footnote of Art. 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which states that “embezzlement is understood to be an unlawful gratuitous seizure and (or) conversion of another's property in favor of the guilty person or other persons who caused damage to the owner or other owner of this property, committed for mercenary purposes”.

The definition of theft is a definition in which the signs inherent in all forms and types of theft and distinguishing theft from other crimes are concentrated and interconnected. The legal definition of theft includes the following features:

someone else's property;

seizure and (or) appeal in favor of the perpetrator or other persons;

wrongfulness;

gratuitousness;

causing damage to the owner or other owner;

selfish purpose.

The absence of at least one of them excludes the possibility of recognizing the committed act as theft Russian criminal law. Special part. Textbook. / Ed. prof. A.I. Raroga. - M., Vocational education, - 2004 ..

Someone else's property as an object of theft must have a combination the following signs Malkov V.M. Criminal law Russia. - Kazan University, - 2004.:

• a) from the social side - to represent property;
• b) on the legal side - to be a stranger to the guilty;
• c) from the economic side - to have material value and a certain cost;
• d) on the physical side - almost always be movable;
• e) from the position of qualification of crimes - to be in free and uncontrolled circulation.

Under property as such, i.e. socio-material object of the surrounding world, we mean things in the creation of which socially necessary human labor is invested, separating them from their natural state, which makes it possible to distinguish theft from certain environmental crimes of illegal harvesting of aquatic animals and plants (Article 256 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and illegal hunting ( article 258 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), since the subject of these crimes is created out of connection with the specified labor. Natural resources in their natural state cannot be the subject of theft. In this regard, theft should be distinguished from environmental crimes.

You need to know that securities can be the subject of theft, but they do not recognize documents of a property nature that are not carriers of value, for example, promissory notes, insurance policies, wills, receipts, powers of attorney, waybills, tickets for travel by rail, road transport, which can be used for their intended purpose only after additional data has been entered into them (filling in the text, sealing, composting, etc.), as well as legitimation signs (tokens of storage rooms, wardrobe numbers). The theft of such items can be considered as theft of documents (Article 325 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). In addition, it can be a preparation for the commission of a number of crimes against property.

The similarity with fraud is the infliction of property damage through deceit or breach of trust. The essential difference is that in case of fraud, the property is illegally removed from the possession of the owner or other legal owner, and in case of causing property damage through deceit or abuse of trust, it is not at the disposal of the victim. Deception of consumers entails criminal liability under a special rule - Art. 200 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

In accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 14, an act of little significance, not representing a public danger, is not a crime, even if it formally contains signs of any corpus delicti. It would not be a crime, for example, to steal a few loaves of bread from a grocery store, or a minor theft of tools from production. The public danger of such actions is extremely insignificant. For petty theft, a person bears administrative responsibility.

Since embezzlement is always an unlawful act, the property that is in the lawful possession of this person cannot be the subject of theft. According to the norm, the property belonging to the perpetrator cannot be the subject of theft. Illegal seizure of property belonging to the perpetrator (including on the right of common ownership), but legally held by another person does not constitute theft, but may attract liability, for example, for arbitrariness. Certain contradictions appear when property is confiscated from an illegal owner with subsequent appeal in their favor (a thief steals from a thief). On the one hand, such actions are illegal, unless, of course, they are aimed at returning property to the owner, legal owner or in law enforcement. On the other hand, they cannot be qualified as theft, since no additional damage is caused to the owner and other legal owners.

The theft should be recognized as completed after the stolen property was confiscated from the victim and material damage was caused to him. However, judicial practice recognizes the theft as completed only after the perpetrator receives real opportunity dispose of stolen property. If the actions are stopped before this moment, after the seizure of property in an attempt to hide it (take it out, take it out), such actions are qualified as an attempt.

The so-called “temporary borrowing” of entrusted funds or other property, that is, appropriation with subsequent return or intention to return the appropriated, is not an appropriation or waste, due to the absence of signs of gratuitousness and selfishness. These actions can be qualified as abuse of power.

The so-called "temporary borrowing" is not theft, when a person arbitrarily temporarily turns other people's money and other material assets into personal use with a subsequent return. Such actions entail civil, administrative, disciplinary responsibility. However, criminal liability for such actions is not excluded, if they contain elements of another crime (abuse of official position, failure to pay wages and other obligatory payments).

Illegal seizure of property committed for other motives (not mercenary) does not constitute theft, however, such actions may contain the composition of another crime. For example, article 166 of the Criminal Code establishes liability for illegal possession of a vehicle without the purpose of stealing. In some cases, misappropriation of property is not a crime at all.

Intentional or negligent infliction of death goes beyond the scope of robbery and must be qualified as a set of crimes, in case of intentional murder - under Part 2 of Clause “h” of Art. 105 (murder associated with robbery). In case of negligent infliction of death during a robbery, the Plenum of the Supreme Court proposed to qualify the act as a combination of robbery with infliction of grievous bodily harm and infliction of grievous bodily harm resulting in death through negligence, however, in this case, the intentional infliction of grievous bodily harm is charged twice, which contradicts the principle justice.

There is no corpus delicti if violence is used not for the purpose of theft, but, for example, in order to avoid detention, such actions are qualified according to other compositions. Causing harm to the health of the victim from hooligan and other (not related to theft) motives with subsequent theft of his property will not be robbery. In practice, difficulties arise in distinguishing between robbery and banditry, since these crimes are similar in their objective side.

Extortion is not a form of embezzlement, but has a significant resemblance to embezzlement. On the objective side, extortion is a demand for the transfer of property, the right to property, the commission of other actions of a property nature under the threat of violence or the destruction or damage of someone else's property, as well as under the threat of dissemination of information disgracing the victim or his relatives, or other information that may cause significant harm to the rights or legitimate interests of the victim or his relatives. Extortion, as well as robbery, is a mercenary and violent crime against property, the main object is property, and the victim's personality is an additional object. The corpus delicti is formal, the crime is considered completed from the moment the demands are made, provided that they are backed up by threats. The nature of the requirements and threats may be different, but this will not affect the qualification. Thus, the composition consists of two elements - requirements and threats. In addition to claims for the transfer of property and the right to property, the subject of claims may be actions of a property nature - the performance of work, admission to a highly paid job, etc. The content of the threats can be different - the threat of violence (from the threat of murder to unspecified threats such as "it will get worse"), the destruction or damage to property, as well as "blackmail" - the threat of dissemination of defamatory information (their nature does not matter, whether it is adultery or non-payment of taxes on a large scale). Extortion with the use of violence forms a qualified composition, while it must be distinguished from robbery and robbery: with robbery, the threat is immediate, with extortion it is directed to the future. The most socially dangerous is the so-called "racket" - extortion in the form of periodic payments from entrepreneurs. If several claims against one or more persons are united by one intent, then the crime is considered to be continued, and not repeated. Extortion committed by an organized group, or in order to obtain property on a large scale, or with the infliction of grievous bodily harm to the victim, or by a person convicted twice for embezzlement and extortion, is especially serious crime and is punished quite severely - imprisonment for a term of seven to fifteen years with confiscation of property.

However, there is a certain problem associated with gaps in the criminal legislation. Criminal elements collect illegal fees from market traders, private taxi drivers, small entrepreneurs, forcing them to pay certain amounts or a certain percentage of the proceeds and using various ways pressure. However, threats of violence, destruction or damage to property, distribution of compromising evidence are used extremely rarely, and if they are used, they are extremely difficult to prove. Such requisitions are, of course, illegal and extremely socially dangerous, but they cannot be qualified as extortion due to the absence of one of the signs of a crime - threats. The second element of extortion is absent, although the first element in itself represents a public danger. Apparently, illegal requisitions are an independent type of theft, although not known to criminal law. The collected funds (the so-called "common fund") go to material support criminal activity organized criminal gangs, as well as leaders of organized criminal groups in places of deprivation of liberty.

For the purpose of correct and uniform application in judicial practice of the current legislation, when qualifying crimes related to infringement on another's property, they decide:

• 1. Embezzlement is understood as the unlawful gratuitous seizure and (or) conversion of someone else's property for their own benefit or for the benefit of other persons, committed for mercenary purposes, which caused damage to the owner or other owner of this property.
• 2. The subject of embezzlement and other crimes against property is someone else's, that is, property not owned by the perpetrator. At the same time, the stolen property at the time of the commission of the crime may be in the possession of the owner himself, or in the possession of other persons to whom this property was entrusted or it was in their illegal possession.
• 3. Illegal seizure of property owned jointly with other persons, including property legal entity, among the founders of which the guilty person is, depending on the direction of intent, can be qualified as theft or as arbitrariness.

The appropriation of someone else's property found or accidentally found in the possession of the guilty person cannot be considered as theft.

4. Disposal of guilty stolen property at one's own discretion (sale or gratuitous transfer to other persons, damage, dismantling, destruction, etc.) does not form an independent corpus delicti and does not require additional qualification.

In cases where the actions of the perpetrator, related to the destruction of stolen property, caused harm to the health or death of a person, providing for liability for theft, depending on the intent, it should also be qualified under the articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provide for liability for an encroachment on the life or health of a person.

5. Theft is the secret theft of someone else's property. When deciding whether the theft is secret, the courts must proceed from the perpetrator's own perception of the situation. If the perpetrator believes that he acts unnoticed by others, then the theft should be qualified as theft, even if the owner or another person is watching his actions. Theft should also be qualified as theft in cases where one of the above persons sees the very event of taking possession of property, but does not realize its criminal nature.

If the theft was committed in the presence of persons with whom the perpetrator is in family, friendly and other personal relationships, in connection with which he expected that they would not inform and suppress his actions, the act in such cases should also be qualified as theft.

If the above persons stopped actions aimed at stealing someone else's property, then the perpetrator should be held liable for the attempted theft.

• 6. Open theft is such theft that is committed in the presence of the victim or persons in charge or under the protection of which the property is, or in full view of strangers, when the person committing theft is aware that these persons understand the unlawful nature of his actions, but ignores this circumstance. It does not matter whether the eyewitnesses of the crime took measures to suppress the actions of the perpetrator. Depending on the degree of danger of the applied violence, the actions of the perpetrator must be qualified as robbery or robbery.
• 7. Illegal taking of someone else's property without the purpose of stealing for its temporary use for oneself or other persons is not theft.

Infliction of harm to human health or other harm during the illegal seizure of someone else's property for temporary use should be qualified under the articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provide for liability for these actions, if these acts are not qualifying signs of a crime that provides for liability for the unlawful taking of someone else's property without the purpose of theft.

• 8. Theft, fraud and robbery are considered completed if the property is confiscated and the perpetrator has a real opportunity to use or dispose of it at his own discretion, and robbery - from the moment of the attack in order to take possession of the property, combined with violence dangerous to the life or health of the victim, or with the threat of such violence.
• 9. When qualifying the actions of the perpetrators on the basis of the theft of another's property by a group of persons by prior conspiracy, it is necessary to find out whether there was an agreement, expressed in any form, of two or more persons to embezzlement, whether there was a conspiracy of these persons before the commission of actions directly aimed at taking possession of another's property , that is, until the fulfillment of the objective side of the corpus delicti by at least one perpetrator.

Theft is qualified on the basis of "a group of persons by prior agreement" and in cases where the joint efforts of two or more persons are combined to commit it and the actions of each of the accomplices are necessary condition to perform the actions of other accomplices, according to the preliminary distribution of roles, and are in causation with a common criminal result that came from the activities of all accomplices. In such cases, it is not necessary that two or more perpetrators participate in the crime; one perpetrator is sufficient if there are other types of accomplices.

• 10. A person who was not in a preliminary agreement with other accomplices of the theft, but in the course of its commission by other persons joined them and took part, must be held liable for specific actions actually committed by him as an accomplice of the crime.
• 11. It cannot be regarded as an act committed by a group of persons by prior conspiracy, deliberately committed together with a person who has not reached the age from which criminal liability for this species crime, or with a person declared insane.

A crime is recognized as committed by an organized group if it is committed stable group persons who have previously united to commit one or more crimes (by an organized criminal group, a criminal community, a gang).

At the same time, in appropriate cases, the acts of the perpetrators must be additionally qualified under the articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provide for liability for the creation of an organized criminal group, as well as for the creation of a criminal community, gang or participation in them.

When considering criminal cases of embezzlement, in which the persons involved had outstanding convictions for crimes that are decriminalized under the new criminal law, the courts, without entering into the revision of sentences on previous convictions of convicts, should not take them into account when qualifying the actions of the perpetrators and imposing penalties.

12. Significant damage to a citizen in the articles of this chapter is determined taking into account his property status, but cannot be less than two thousand five hundred rubles.

In the articles of this Chapter, the value of property exceeding two hundred and fifty thousand rubles is recognized as a large amount, and one million rubles as an especially large amount.

When determining the value of the property that has become the subject of a crime, one should proceed, depending on the circumstances of its acquisition by the owner, from retail, market or commission prices that were in force at the time of the crime, confirmed by relevant documents. In the absence of a price and a dispute arises about the amount of stolen property, the value of the property is determined on the basis of an expert opinion.

The amount of stolen property is determined on the basis of its value and in cases where the perpetrators, in order to conceal the theft, are presented with other less valuable property instead of the stolen property. In this case, the value of the property presented in exchange for the stolen property may be taken into account when determining the amount of damage.

13. Under the premises in the articles of this chapter are understood buildings and structures, regardless of the form of ownership, intended for the temporary stay of people or accommodation material assets for business or other business purposes.

Under the storage in the articles of this chapter is meant utility rooms, separated from residential buildings, land plots, pipelines, other structures, regardless of the form of ownership, which are intended for permanent or temporary storage of material assets.

• 14. Actions of a guilty person who has committed petty theft of someone else's property belonging to an organization or being under its jurisdiction shall entail criminal liability if they are committed by way of robbery or robbery.
• 15. Deception in case of fraud may be expressed in a deliberate false statement about knowingly non-existent facts or in concealment of facts that, under the circumstances of the case, should have been reported to the owner or owner of the property.

Fraud may concern both the actual intention of the perpetrator, and in relation to the quantity and quality of the goods, the identity of the subject of the crime and other circumstances that may mislead the victim.

Fraud can be both verbal and written.

In case of fraud by abuse of trust, the perpetrator, using the trust relationship between him and the owner or other legal owner of the property, deceives or misleads him.

16. Items used as weapons should be understood as items that could cause bodily harm to the victim, dangerous to life or health (kitchen and penknife, razor, ax, crowbar, club, screwdriver, board, stone, etc. .), as well as items intended for temporary target destruction (mechanical sprayers, aerosol and other devices equipped with tear and irritant substances), regardless of whether they were prepared in advance.

If the perpetrator threatened with a deliberately unusable weapon or an unloaded weapon or an object imitating a weapon (a model of a pistol, a toy dagger, etc.), not intending to use these objects to inflict bodily harm dangerous to life or health, the courts, when qualifying him criminal acts should proceed from the victim's awareness of the nature, reality and degree of danger of the attack on him. If the victim understood that he was being threatened with an unusable or unloaded weapon or an imitation of a weapon, the actions of the perpetrator should be qualified as robbery, if violence dangerous to life and health was actually used, or as robbery.

17. In cases where, in order to steal someone else's property, a potent, poisonous or intoxicating substance dangerous to life or health was introduced into the body of the victim against his will, the deed should be qualified as robbery.

If, for the above purpose, a substance that does not pose a danger to life or health was introduced into the body of the victim against his will, the deed should be qualified as robbery.

If the victim was not aware of the fact of unlawful taking of his property in connection with being in a state of intoxication or sleep resulting from voluntary use alcoholic beverages, narcotic drugs, potent, poisonous or intoxicating substances, then the actions of the perpetrator must be qualified as secret theft.

The properties and nature of the action of the substances used in the commission of these crimes must be established with the involvement of a specialist or by expert means.

18. Violence that is not dangerous to life or health should be understood as beatings or other violent acts related to inflicting physical pain on the victim that did not cause a short-term health disorder or a slight permanent loss of general ability to work.

Violence dangerous to life and health should be understood as such violence that caused severe and moderate harm to the health of the victim, as well as causing minor harm to health that caused a short-term health disorder or a slight permanent loss of general ability to work, which are established by expert means.

The presence of elements of robbery or robbery, combined with violence, should be recognized in cases where violence was a means of taking possession of property or its retention. The actions of the perpetrator, begun as theft and continued in the presence of the owner or other persons, should be qualified as robbery. When further violence is used in these cases in order to seize property or to retain it immediately after the seizure, it should be qualified as robbery or robbery combined with violence.

• 19. When resolving the issue of distinguishing robbery and robbery from extortion combined with violence, the courts should take into account that if during robbery and robbery violence is a means of taking possession of property or retaining it, then in extortion it reinforces the threat of using violence if the extortioner's requirements are not met. Taking possession of property during robbery and robbery occurs simultaneously with the commission of violent acts or immediately after they are committed; in case of extortion, the intent of the perpetrator is aimed at obtaining the required property in the future.
• 20. In cases where the illegal seizure of someone else's property was committed as a result of hooliganism, rape or other criminal acts, it is necessary to establish the purpose for which this property was seized.

If a person pursued a mercenary goal, his actions, depending on the method of taking possession of property, should be qualified as a combination of crimes against property and hooliganism, rape or another crime.

21. The acquisition or sale of property knowingly obtained by criminal means may be recognized as complicity in theft if these actions were promised to the perpetrator before or during the commission of the crime or for other reasons (for example, due to their systematic commission) and gave reason to the perpetrator of the crime to count on similar assistance.

Under the acquisition of property, knowingly obtained by criminal means, is understood the actual possession of property or the right to it, under the sale - respectively, the transfer of property or the right to it.

is such theft that is committed in the presence of the owner or other owner of the property or in full view of strangers, when the person committing this crime is aware that the persons present at the same time understand the unlawful nature of his actions, regardless of whether they took measures to prevent these actions or not.

4. If the person present at the illegal seizure of someone else's property is not aware of the unlawfulness of these actions or is a close relative of the perpetrator, who, in this regard, expects that during the seizure of property he will not encounter opposition from the specified person, the deed should be qualified as theft of someone else's property. property. If the listed persons took measures to prevent the theft of other people's property (for example, they demanded to stop these unlawful actions), then the responsibility of the perpetrator for the deed occurs according to article 161 Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

If in the course of the theft the actions of the perpetrator are discovered by the owner or other owner of the property or other persons, but the perpetrator, being aware of this, continues to illegally seize or retain property, the deed should be qualified as robbery

Objective signs of extortion represented by two independent actions - the presentation of property claims and the statement of the threat of causing certain harm. The subject of extortion, in addition to someone else's property, is the commission of other actions of a property nature. Actions of a property nature are actions in the course of which the extortionist receives property benefits. For example, these actions may include the destruction of an IOU, will, refusal of a share in common property etc.

Extortion, along with violent robbery and robbery, refers to two-objective crimes. With extortion, there is unlawful interference in the life of a person through the presentation of illegal property claims and the statement of threats.

Subjective side extortion is characterized by guilt in the form of direct intent and selfish purpose. Subject - a natural sane person who has reached the age of 14.

Extortion(Article 163 of the Criminal Code). An object crimes: main - relations of a certain form of ownership, additional - health, honor and dignity of the individual. Item - other people's property, both movable and immovable, the right to property, as well as actions of a property nature, which, in particular, include the free performance of work or the provision of services subject to payment - construction, repair, restoration, etc.

objective side consists in the requirement of the perpetrator to transfer property or the right to property to him or to commit actions of a property nature, accompanied by a threat of a certain content.

Fraud (art. 159 of the Criminal Code). An object Item -

objective side

Subjective side Subject -

Robbery(Article 161 of the Criminal Code). An object crimes: main - relations of a certain form of ownership; optional - personal health. Item - someone else's property.

objective side consists in the open theft of another's property. open way embezzlement means that the perpetrator seizes someone else's property, realizing that his actions and their criminal nature are obvious to the owner, other owner or other persons, but ignores this circumstance and commits an encroachment.

When deciding on the method of theft - whether it was secretly or openly committed, one should take into account the objective and subjective criteria, the content of which was analyzed when considering the composition of the theft. The moment of the end of the robbery is determined in the same way as the moment of the end of the theft.

Subjective side characterized by guilt in the form of direct intent and selfish purpose. Subject -

Theft(Article 158 of the Criminal Code). An object crimes - property relations of a certain form. Item - someone else's property.

objective side Theft consists in the secret theft of another's property. Theft is considered secret in the following situations:

1) when it is committed in the absence of the owner, other owner of the property, as well as other persons (for example, at night, a person, having broken the locks, enters someone else's cellar, seizes property and hides unnoticed by anyone);

2) when it is committed in the presence of the owner, other owner or other persons, but unnoticed by them (for example, a citizen, taking advantage of the fact that the seller is distracted and does not observe what is happening, steals some goods from the store counter and hides);

3) when it is committed in the presence of eyewitnesses who observe the perpetrator, but are not aware of the unlawfulness of his actions, believing that he has the right to property (for example, in front of a group of people, a citizen gets into a parked car and leaves, those present at the same time believe that the vehicle the means belongs to him, but in fact, in their presence, theft is committed);

4) when it is committed in the presence of persons who, due to certain circumstances, obviously for the guilty person are not able to realize what is happening (sleeping, mentally ill, in a state of fainting or a strong degree of intoxication, minors, etc.);

5) when it is committed in the presence of persons who observe the actions of the perpetrator, who are aware of the illegal nature of his actions, but do not let them know about their presence, in connection with which the perpetrator believes that he is acting secretly (for example, a neighbor watches through a peephole, as in an apartment opposite, a thief enters, and subsequently leaves it with stolen things).

Subjective side theft is characterized by direct intent and selfish purpose. Subject- a natural sane person who has reached the age of 14.

Robbery(Article 162 of the Criminal Code). The law defines robbery as an attack for the purpose of stealing someone else's property, committed with the use of violence dangerous to life or health, or with the threat of such violence.

Objects crimes: main - relations of a certain form of ownership; additional - the health of the individual. The item is someone else's property. objective the party is an attack committed with the use of violence dangerous to life or health, or with the threat of such violence. According to explanatory dictionaries Russian language, attack means "to rush at someone with a hostile intent, to start acting against someone with a hostile goal." Thus, the attack, as a rule, is of a sudden, unexpected nature and represents a violent impact on the victim. The attack may be overt, or it may not be obvious to the victim (for example, a blow to the back, a shot from cover, etc.).

Subjective side characterized by guilt in the form of direct intent and the purpose of stealing someone else's property. The presence of other targets during the attack excludes liability for robbery. Subject - a natural sane person who has reached the age of 14.

Fraud (art. 159 of the Criminal Code). An object crimes - relations of a certain form of ownership. Item - someone else's property or the right to someone else's property.

objective side fraud consists in stealing someone else's property or acquiring the right to someone else's property by deceit or breach of trust.

Subjective side fraud - guilt in the form of direct intent and selfish purpose. Subject - a natural sane person who has reached the age of 16.

Embezzlement or embezzlement(Article 160 of the Criminal Code). The object of the crime relations of a certain form of ownership. Subject- someone else's property entrusted to the guilty.

objective side expressed in appropriation or waste, i.e. theft of another's property entrusted to the guilty. Assignment is the separation of a part of the property entrusted to the guilty person, the seizure and gratuitous circulation of it by the latter in his favor. Waste is the seizure of part of the property entrusted to the guilty person, and its gratuitous circulation in favor of other persons or consumption, spending by the guilty person himself. Compositions of appropriation and material waste. The appropriation is considered completed when the perpetrator, having seized the property, received a real opportunity to dispose of it at his own discretion. The moment of termination of waste is specific, it is associated with the moment of consumption of the seized property or with its alienation.

subjective side - intentional guilt in the form of direct intent and selfish purpose. Subject - a natural sane person who has reached the age of 16 who has been entrusted with stolen property. Thus, the subjects of the crime in question are persons who, by virtue of official duties, contractual relations or a special assignment exercise in relation to the stolen property the powers to dispose, manage, deliver or store. First of all, these are financially responsible persons: sellers, cashiers, supply agents, storekeepers, freight forwarders, etc. These can be persons acting on special instructions (for example, the chairman of the parent committee of the class, on behalf of the parent team, having collected money for a social event, assigns them

Theft of items that have special value (Article 164 of the Criminal Code). An object crimes - relations of a certain form of ownership. Item crimes - objects or documents of special historical, scientific, artistic or cultural value.

the objective side crime is formed by the theft of the listed items, committed in any of the possible ways. Extortion of especially valuable items should be qualified under Art. 163 of the Criminal Code, since it is not a type of theft. The end of the crime depends on how the theft was committed.

subjective side characterizes guilt in the form of direct intent and selfish purpose. Subject - a natural sane person who has reached the age of 16.

Causing property damage by deceit or breach of trust(Article 165 of the Criminal Code). An object crimes - relations of a certain form of ownership. objective side consists in causing property damage to the owner or other owner of the property by deceit or abuse of trust in the absence of signs of theft. When this criminal act is committed, the damage caused to the owner or other owner is in the form of lost profits. Property, cash are not withdrawn from the funds of the owner, as happens in the case of theft, and do not enter them as a result of the wrongful act of the perpetrator.

Subjective side crimes - guilt in the form of direct intent and selfish purpose. Subject crimes - a physical sane person who has reached the age of 16.

Item of theft specific property, movable or immovable, which is seized by the guilty person and (or) is turned by him in his own favor or in favor of other persons and is alien to the latter, i.e. is not owned or otherwise legally owned.

In order to be the subject of theft, an object must have certain properties. In the theory of criminal law, three groups of these properties are distinguished: physical, economic and legal.* Physical Properties mean that the subject of theft can be material object the external world, which is outlined in space and is in one of three states - solid, liquid or gaseous. It can be both inanimate and animate (for example, pets).

The application of the norms of criminal liability depends on the nature of the criminal act, and most of all difficulties arise with the differentiation of the elements of property crimes. So, open theft of another's property (robbery) is the illegal taking of property in full view of the victim or third parties. Theft is a secret act, and robbery is accompanied by an attack on the owner of valuables.

What is open theft of another's property

The section of criminal law, which contains offenses that encroach on the protection of property rights of citizens, is the largest and most extensive. This is due to the many forms of crimes against property. Robbery is one of the social dangerous crimes and does not require qualification minimum amount material harm. That is, even the open possession of 100 rubles will entail liability under Article 161 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

The designation of criminal acts speaks for itself. Openness means that actions aimed at capturing material goods, are performed in front of the owner of the valuables or those persons who are temporarily entrusted with the protection of things. An exception is accomplices in a criminal act.

In addition, it is very important that the attacker himself knows that his actions are being observed, and deliberately ignore this fact. If the offender does not see eyewitnesses and believes that his act is secret, then the offense must be qualified as a secret theft.

In addition, does not affect the determination of the composition and the reaction of the victim. Whether or not the owner of the property made attempts to stop the crime and get their belongings back is irrelevant.

Theft is the illegal taking of objects against the consent of the rightful owner. Other people's things include all objects that do not belong to the offender or his close relatives, as well as accomplices.

According to the norms of the criminal law of the Russian Federation, illegal actions exclude the infliction of violence to the victim or are accompanied by minor physical injuries. If, after the completion of the criminal acts, the victim tried to take away his property, for which he received physical damage, then it is additionally necessary to apply the article regulating mutilation.

These features of the crime make it possible to single out a significant difference between secret theft and open theft, as well as from robbery, which is accompanied by the infliction of significant physical injuries.

Corpus delicti

Illegal appropriation of property will be regarded as robbery only if there are mandatory signs of this criminal offense. Thus, the object of the crime is public relations in the field of protection of property rights. In addition, the designation of the object that the attacker encroaches on is very important.

Important! If the theft is aimed at deliberately taking possession of weapons, narcotic drugs, pharmacological preparations and other special objects, then other articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are additionally applied during qualification. The main thing is that the attacker knows what he is encroaching on, and strives to take possession of this property.

The objective side of the act is manifested only in the form of active actions aimed at openly taking possession of material goods. The most common way is a jerk. In this case, the criminal act is considered completed from the moment the property was in the hands of the attacker.

The subject of the commission of an act can only be a natural person whose sanity has been proven by an examination. The minimum age of liability is 14 years. It is also important to prove that the attacker was fully aware of his actions, their illegality and wanted to get someone else's property. That is, there must be direct intent.

Qualifying features

In addition to the general corpus delicti, that is, taking possession of property without causing bodily harm, there are also additional circumstances that increase the severity of sanctions. These include:

• if the criminal offense was committed by prior agreement by a group of persons (two or more participants) who purposefully wished to openly receive valuables;
• repetition, that is, the commission of a crime after the entry into force of the court decision on the first fact, but before the expiration of the criminal record;
• if the actions resulted in penetration into a residential or other premises;
• when the actions were accompanied by physical violence;
• if the amount of material damage is significant or falls under the designation of a large amount;
• participation in an offense by an organized group;
• if this is the third or more crime from the section of property misdemeanors (the main thing is the presence of a court decision on previous episodes, as well as the validity of a criminal record).

Depending on the signs, one of the three parts of the article of the Criminal Code will be applied to the guilty person. If there are signs of several parts at the same time, then the punishment is established according to the most severe.

What is the liability

As mentioned above, the perpetrators will be punished based on many factors. The main ones include:

• form of committing a criminal act;
• the presence of previous convictions;
• qualification;
• the amount of material damage;
• presence of aggravating or extenuating circumstances.

Table No. 1. “Maximum permissible types of penalties depending on the chosen qualification of criminal activity”

Robbery is the open taking of another person's property. To understand the term in legal aspect, let's analyze it detailed description, varieties and qualified compositions of robberies. Let's analyze what robbery is, and what consequences threaten a criminal who has committed an offense, on the basis of the criminal code for today.

Definition of the term

In Art. 161 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation it is noted that robbery is an open theft of another's property. In terminology, robbery should be distinguished from theft and robbery:

• Theft is a criminal act that is committed intentionally, with the aim of secretly taking possession of someone else's property. In this case, the owner, proprietor or other disinterested person does not know about the commission of the crime until the fact of theft that caused property damage is discovered.
• Robbery is a crime that is committed intentionally open target taking possession of another's property. In this case, the offender understands that the owner of the property, another owner or a third party sees the fact of theft and fully understands the essence of what is happening. The offender may use violent methods that cannot cause serious harm to life and health, or threaten such violence.
• Robbery is a crime that is committed intentionally, with a mercenary desire to obtain property belonging to another person. In this case, the offender commits an attack and uses violence that can cause serious harm to the life and health of the victim, or uses threats of such violence.

Finished robbery

The robbery can receive the status of completed only if the offender, after committing the theft, has real remedy to dispose or use the stolen property at will. The offender can use the stolen property at his own discretion or transfer it to another person and dispose of it for selfish purposes.

Otherwise, the robbery is considered incomplete. If the perpetrator could not use the property obtained in the process of robbery, then his deeds are interpreted as unfinished. In this case, it is assumed that the perpetrator lost control of the property, lost it, could not sell or exchange it, hid it and could not use it, etc.

The lack of benefit from owning someone else's property is clarified during the investigation and will be taken into account by the court in the process of issuing a guilty verdict.

Interpretation of the 2nd paragraph of the article

The second paragraph refers to aggravating circumstances in the commission of robbery. If such conditions are revealed during the investigation, the court makes a decision in accordance with paragraph 2, the punishment for which differs from prosecution under paragraphs 1 and 3:

• The robbery was carried out not by one person, but by a group of people who had previously agreed among themselves. A group in a preliminary conspiracy is a company of criminals of 2-3 or more participants who have previously agreed to commit this crime together.
• Penetration of the perpetrator into the premises, storage or dwelling on illegal grounds.
• The perpetrator during the robbery used violence that did not result in the loss of health or life of the victim, or threatened with such violence.
• The value of the stolen property is large size. A large amount of damage means the cost of property from 250 thousand rubles. up to 1 million rubles When committing a crime relating to the banking sector, credit institutions and insurance payments, an amount of at least 1.5 million rubles is considered a large amount.

Interpretation of the 3rd paragraph of the article

The second paragraph refers to aggravating circumstances in the commission of robbery. If such conditions are identified during the investigation, the court makes a decision in accordance with paragraph 3, the punishment for which differs from prosecution under paragraphs 1 and 2:

• In this case, the perpetrator of the crime is not one person, but organized group. An organized group is a group of 2-3 participants. Distinctive feature from the group of the second item is sustainability. Those. an organized group is more stable, its members can be united to commit not only this, but also other offenses.
• Especially large cost of the incurred damage. This amount means that the amount of damage caused is at least 1 million rubles. (The exceptions are crimes in the field of lending, payment cards, information technology and insurance.) In this case, the large amount of damage is more than 12 million rubles.

Punishment for robbery

According to the criminal code Russian Federation liability before the court depends on the severity of the test. Each paragraph of the article "Robbery" of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for a different measure of punishment. During the investigation, the prosecution determines the point under which charges will be brought based on all the details of the offense.

When a sentence is passed under the article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “Robbery”, the crime cannot be qualified as committed through negligence. Robbery is a deliberate and open crime aimed at taking possession of another's property.

The punishment for this crime can only be taken in court. When sentencing, the judge takes into account the aggravating circumstances, the amount of damages, and other circumstances of the case.

On the video about the application of Article 161 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

Robbery has similarities with crimes such as theft and robbery. These crimes are characterized by the taking of someone else's property, but the circumstances of the theft vary. In many countries, there is no practice of singling out robbery in separate group. It is regarded as part of theft or robbery, depending on the presence of aggravating circumstances in the case.

After proving the guilt of the offender in court, he is assigned a punishment that cannot be higher or lower than what is written opposite each item. The judge can reclassify the crime from one paragraph to another and impose a punishment on the basis of it.

Now we know what the term robbery means. How it differs from other types of theft, and found out the penalties for criminals whose guilt was proven in court.