from 01.01.2023 until now
Saint Petersburg, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
UDK 343.2/.7 Уголовное право
Introduction. Embezzlement is actual problem for personality, society and the state, since this specified type of crime not only has a destructive effect on the institution of property and the mental state of victims and their family members, but also accounts for the largest share in the structure of all crimes registered on the territory of the Russian Federation. Law enforcement practice in the field of criminal law counteraction to the covert violent embezzlement indicates that a misunderstanding by practitioners of investigative bodies and bodies of inquiry of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia of the secrecy criteria and the differences between violence and physical impact in the commission of embezzlement leads to mistakes in the qualification of this type of crime. Methods. To solve the goals and objectives of this scientific research the author used general scientific (analysis and synthesis; induction and deduction; comparison; description; logical and structural-functional methods) and private scientific (comparative legal method, method of legal statistics) methods, as well as methods of legal monitoring and questionnaires. Results. According to the results of the scientific research it was concluded that in the theory of criminal law and investigative judicial practice, there is a covert violent embezzlement. In order to improve the practice of criminal law combating this type of crime, within the framework of this article, the criteria of secrecy were defined; violence that is not dangerous to life and health was distinguished from physical influence used by the guilty person to distract attention when committing embezzlement; the conceptual and categorical framework was clarified and specific ways of solving the designated problem for the unified application of criminal legislation in solving the issues of qualification of the specified criminal act were proposed.
crimes against property, embezzlement, secrecy, violence, covert violent embezzlement
1. Bojcov, A. I. (2002). Prestupleniya protiv sobstvennosti: monografiya. Saint Petersburg: Izdatel'stvo «Yuridicheskij centr Press».
2. Borchashvili, I. Sh. (2002). Kvalifikaciya prestuplenij protiv sobstvennosti: monografiya. Karaganda: Karagandinskij yuridicheskij institut MVD RK im. B. Bejsenova.
3. Borchashvili, I. Sh. (2010). Hishchenie chuzhogo imushchestva: monografiya. Karaganda: Karagandinskij yuridicheskij institut MVD RK im. B. Bejsenova.
4. Burkina, O. A. (2014). Ponyatie i vidy nasiliya v prestupleniyah protiv sobstvennosti v teorii ugolovnogo prava Rossii. Probely v rossijskom zakonodatel'stve, 1, 122–131.
5. Vladimirov, V. A. (1974). Kvalifikaciya pohishchenij lichnogo imushchestva: monografiya. Moskow: Izdatel'stvo «Yuridicheskaya literatura».
6. Vladimirov, V. A., Lyapunov, Yu. A. (1983). Korystnye posyagatel'stva na socialisticheskuyu sobstvennost': monografiya. Moskow: Izdatel'stvo «Yuridicheskaya literatura».
7. Gauhman, L. D. (1969). Bor'ba s nasil'stvennymi posyagatel'stvami: monografiya. Moskow: Izdatel'stvo «Yuridicheskaya literatura».
8. Ershova, O. P. (2023). Formy i vidy hishchenij v ugolovnom prave. V Yurisprudenciya XXI veka: pozicii zakona, doktriny i praktiki: sbornik materialov Vserossijskoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii (Irkutsk, 01 marta 2023 goda, str. 38–46). Irkutsk: Centr nauchno-informacionnyh tekhnologij "Asterion". EDN DLKOCA.
9. Ivanov, A. N. (2023). Nasil'stvennye i nenasil'stvennye formy hishchenij. Grabezh i razboj. Molodoj uchenyj, 19 (466), 339–341.
10. Kucyk, V. P. (2023). Poboi kak priznak ob"ektivnoj storony prestuplenij, predusmotrennyh stat'yami 116 i 1161 UK RF. V Aktual'nye problemy predvaritel'nogo rassledovaniya: materialy mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii (Sankt-Peterburg, 26 aprelya 2023 goda, str. 109–110). Saint Petersburg: Sankt-Peterburgskij universitet MVD Rossii. EDN SGHBLS.
11. Mihajlov, M. P. (1958). Ugolovnaya otvetstvennost' za krazhu lichnogo imushchestva i razboj (po sovetskomu pravu): monografiya. Moskow: Izdatel'stvo «Gosyurizdat».
12. Rubinshtejn, S. L. (2023). Osnovy obshchej psihologii. Moskow: Izdatel'stvo «AST».
13. Sazanova, E. A. (2018). O nekotoryh spornyh voprosah ugolovno-pravovoj ocenki poboev. Nauka i obrazovanie: hozyajstvo i ekonomika; predprinimatel'stvo; pravo i upravlenie, 5 (96), 88–90.
14. Stepanov, M. V. (2016). Voprosy kvalifikacii nenasil'stvennyh form hishcheniya. Vestnik Volzhskogo universiteta im. V. N. Tatishcheva, 1 (2), 241–250.
15. Tokarchuk, R. E. (2015). Tajnoe nasil'stvennoe hishchenie v teorii ugolovnogo prava i praktike primeneniya ugolovnogo zakona. Ugolovnoe pravo, 1, 96–99.
16. Hilyuta, V. V. (2014). Formy hishcheniya v doktrine ugolovnogo prava: monografiya. Moskow: Izdatel'stvo «Yurlitinform».
17. Hilyuta, V. V. (2017). Konceptual'no-teoreticheskaya model' opredeleniya form hishcheniya v ugolovnom zakone. Voprosy pravovedeniya, 1 (39), 90–110.
18. Chelyabova, Z. M. (2014). Ugolovno-pravovaya harakteristika nasiliya v grabezhe i razboe. Gumanitarnye issledovaniya, 4 (52), 138–143.
19. Shchepel'kov, V. F. (2013). Hishchenie s primeneniem nasiliya: vsegda li eto razboj ili grabezh? Ugolov¬noe pravo, 3, 48–52.
20. Yani, P. S. (2015). Voprosy kvalifikacii razboya. Zakonnost', 9 (971), 45–50.
