Criminal liability for fraud. Art. 159 of the Criminal Code in a new edition

In Section VIII of the Penal Code, 21 the chapter formulates criminal acts against property. It establishes an article for fraud (Article 159). The Criminal Code defines the concept and responsibility for this crime. Let us consider it in more detail.

Fraud: Art. 159 of the Criminal Code

Under this act should be understood theft of property of others or the acquisition of rights to it through the abuse of confidence or by deception. New edition of Art. 159 of the Criminal Code provides for the following types of punishment:

1. A fine of up to 120 000 rubles. Or in the amount of salary or other income of the guilty for a period of up to a year.
2. Compulsory work up to 180 hours.
3. Arrest for 2-4 months.
4. Correctional labor for 6-12 months.
5. Imprisonment for a period of up to 2 years.

Aggravating circumstances

A crime can be committed by prior conspiracy by a group of persons or causing significant damage to the victim. For such fraud art. 159 (2) of the Criminal Code provides:

1. The fine is up to 300 thousand rubles. (Or the amount of income or convict's salary for a period of up to 2 years).
2. Correctional labor for 1-2 years.
3. Imprisonment for a period of up to 5 years.
4. Compulsory work for 180-240 hours.

Crimes of Officials

For such fraud art. 159 of the Criminal Code establishes:

1. The fine is 100-150 thousand rubles. Or in the amount of salary or other income of the guilty person for 1-3 years.
2. Conclusion for 2-6 years.

In the latter case, in addition to imprisonment, an additional fine of up to 10 thousand rubles may be additionally imposed. Or in the amount of salary or other income for a period of up to 1 month. These measures are also envisaged for large-scale theft.

Additionally

Part 4 of Art. 159 of the Criminal Code for an act committed as part of an organized group or a particularly large size, sets the penalty in the form of imprisonment for 5-10 years. At the same time, an additional fine of up to 1 million rubles may be imposed. In the amount of income or c / c of the guilty entity for a period of up to 3 years. Art. 159 (4) of the Criminal Code establishes the most severe punishment. So, consider the topic further.

Art. 159 of the Criminal Code with comments

The dispositive part includes the basic structure, the qualified (part two) and the particularly qualified one. The concept of "fraud" is used only when describing a criminal act. Responsibility for it is provided for by a special legislative norm. Art. 159 of the Criminal Code allows us to distinguish two types of wrongful act: theft of property and the acquisition of rights to it. In addition, the norm indicates certain ways of committing a crime. These methods are: abuse of trust and deception.

Property theft

This definition is considered the original in Art. 159 of the Criminal Code. With the comments in paragraph 1 of the Decision adopted by the Plenum of the Supreme Council in 2002 (No. 29), the signs of embezzlement are also the criteria for the crime established in the article in question. The Supreme Court gives a fairly clear definition of the act. Theft - a free illegal treatment or seizure of property belonging to other persons, in favor of the guilty or other entity, causing damage to the owner (owner). This formulation provides a unified understanding of this act as a generic definition. So all kinds and forms of theft, including fraud, come together.

Cheating

Art. 159 CC uses this concept when characterizing an act. Proceeding from the fact that deceit can be realized only within the framework of specific relations between citizens, it can not be recognized as an action that does not affect the human psyche. In accordance with this, under Art. 159 of the Criminal Code, the use of stolen or forged bank cards, the dropping of various metal objects and other similar actions instead of coins can not be classified as such a crime. In this case, it is possible to adopt the recommendations of the Criminal Code, drawn up for the CIS countries, about including in the rates of theft committed through the use of technical devices. In the absence of such a provision in the legislation, the misappropriation of property by the above-mentioned methods to a greater extent forms a composition of secret theft or theft rather than fraud. As a deception, the message of false information to the subject who is able to perceive and realize them, to report in their own actions.

Misconception

It acts as a consequence of deception. A victim who receives false information is mistaken about certain events, actions, facts. This state influences the subsequent decision to dispose of own property in favor of the offender or the persons named by him. Misconception acts as an intermediate link in the causal connection between the behavior of the perpetrator and the consequence of the loss of the owner of material values or rights to them.

Crime Scheme

From the beginning to the completion of the wrongful act, the following chain can be built: deceit (which the perpetrator commits) - the misconception of the victim - the actions of the victim on the basis of the received false information (transfer of property or rights to it or non-obstruction of the seizure of valuables) - the result of misappropriation of the object Benefit (or other persons).

In the absence of at least one element, the scheme does not constitute a crime, and a person's behavior can not be qualified under art. 159 of the Criminal Code.

An Important Moment

Delusion is the continuation of the distortion of the truth by the criminal in the sphere of strong-willed and intellectual activity of the victim. It must necessarily be the consequence of behavioral acts of the perpetrator. At the same time, he can either perform certain actions that contribute to the formation or maintenance of delusions, or not to commit them. In the latter case, the offender simply does not destroy the distorted, incorrect representation already created by the victim. In this regard, it is difficult to agree with the thesis that deception is impossible with complete silence. Even in the absence of direct impact on the psyche of the victim, he may be confused.

Qualification signs

In the sense of Art. 159 of the Criminal Code, the injured citizen must transfer his property or give the offender or persons indicated by him certain rights. In this connection, it is possible to distinguish a characteristic characteristic of the subject in respect of which the encroachment is carried out. The victim, therefore, must himself have the right to property and the ability to dispose of the values at his own discretion. As for deception, this word is used in its narrow meaning. With its expanded interpretation, the meaning of the article is inevitably distorted and the principle of legality is violated . Legally, the concept of "deception" is characterized by two signs: informational and moral. To qualify the act under Art. 159 CC must meet both of these criteria.

Abuse of trust

Fraud in this way is fixed in practice less often than using deception. Confidence is considered faithfulness, sincerity, good intentions, honesty of another person. In committing a crime, the perpetrator uses this. As a rule, in this form, fraud arises in a relationship of trust, which formed between him and the victim. In case of abuse, as in the case of fraud, the owner (owner) of the property is deceived. As a result, he himself passes the values to the attacker, suggesting that there are legitimate reasons for this. Voluntary transfer of property not only means the actual transfer of objects into the wrong hands, but also the receipt by the guilty of certain opportunities to dispose of them or use them.

Uncertainty of legislation

Art. 159 of the Criminal Code in the new wording defines the crime in question similar to the norm in force in the previous Code. Only the definition of "appropriation" was adjusted. In the existing art. 159 CC term is replaced by "embezzlement". However, due to the current judicial practice, the composition of the act can be considered almost the same. According to some jurists, the legislator, perhaps, should somewhat expand the optional part of Art. 159 CC. At the same time, the crime itself would be reduced . However, the legislator chose to split the act into actual fraud, causing property damage, abuse of trust, deception (without signs of embezzlement), "pseudo business", malicious evasion of payment of accounts payable and other similar unlawful acts. Lawmakers, according to experts, did not take into account that behind the established multiplicity of economic crimes lies the diversity of only one composition. They just act fraud. Some jurists consider such fragmentation unjustified, paralyzing the application of the norms of legislation. In modern conditions, in their opinion, it is necessary to expand the dispositive part of Art. 159 CC. It should include the compositions provided for and the 165th article of the Code. At the same time, it is necessary to change the generic name, calling the article "Causing property damage with a mercenary goal by abusing trust or reporting unreliable information." This formulation will most accurately reflect the legal content of fraud.

Complexities of composition formation

The historical experience of the formation and development of criminal legislation indicates a repeated change in the concept of the legal concept of fraud. As a result, several practical and scientific-theoretical problems were formed. The emergence of new methods of fraud contributed to the emergence of a number of issues related to law enforcement activities, including in the process of qualification of the crime in the specialized parts of Art. 159 CC. The complex structure of the wrongful act was expressed in the legislative definition of the crime. When formulating the task was to eliminate ambiguity, to establish unambiguous terminology. In addition, it is necessary to include in the composition indications of legal facts. All this would preclude the emergence of a law enforcement problem. In the criminal legislation of some foreign countries there are various types of fraud, a variety of qualifying criteria is provided. To a certain extent, these or other elements can be adopted and domestic rules of law.

Statistics

Illegal acts, the purpose of which is the property of law-abiding citizens, are considered today the most widespread of all criminal crimes registered in the Russian Federation. During 2007, for example, more than half a million people were convicted (about 60% of the total number of those brought to justice and 19% more than five years earlier) under articles provided for in Chapter 21. In this category, fraud is one of the most common . For five years (from 2002 to 2007), the number of persons brought to justice who committed this crime increased more than 3.6 times. In 2007, their number reached 43 thousand people. The proportion of fraud in the system of crimes against property has also increased. In 2002, it was 2.5%, and in 2007 it was 7.8%.

Conclusion

Selfish crimes, namely to such fraud, in Russia and the world are in fact and statistically dominant. The dynamics of these acts determines the main trends and problems of the entire criminal situation as a whole. When committing fraud, self-interest serves as a fundamental goal. If during the Soviet period this crime was considered a relatively rare phenomenon, today, with the transition of Russia to a market economic system, it is developing at an intensive pace. The active development of technology contributes to the emergence of new types of fraud. The current legal regime in the country must provide tight control, create the necessary protection of citizens and their property from encroachments. This goal is achieved by the formation of an appropriate legislative framework, by toughening the punishment. The likelihood of prosecution for violations of established regulations should act as the main restrictor that suppresses the criminal actions of fraudsters.