Ðóñ Eng Cn Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Law and Politics
Reference:

Korchagin A.G., Trushova I.V. Modern Russian criminal legislation and frauds

Abstract: We investigated the criminal liability for various types of fraud in modern Russia with regard to their differentiation: according to the mechanism of possession of property and various methods of committing. We drew attention to the competition problem of criminal law, providing various types of fraud for adjacent elements of crime and fraud qualification along with other crimes: in lending, upon receipt of payments, in the insurance industry, in the field of computer information, in the field of entrepreneurship, bribery and modern corruption. The article describes the current practice and legislation of the Russian Federation (namely, the Criminal Code) in comparison with several foreign countries, such as Italy, Germany, Holland and Spain. According to the authors, the law must provide for a rule according to which the criminal case on nonexonerative base requires the consent of not only the person called to account, but also the victim. Criminal law should create favorable conditions for the fair market participants and minimize the harm to the economy caused by deception and abuse.


Keywords:

fraud, ways of committing, responsibility, qualifications, Insurance Institute, the borrower, payment cards, competition of standards, bribery, corruption.


This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article

This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here .
References
1. Skoblikov P.A. Mezhotraslevaya i vnutriotraslevaya preyuditsiya prigovorov i svyazannykh s nimi sudebnykh aktov // Zakon. 2013. ¹8. S. 59-65.
2. Bochkarev S., Radchenko O I vse-taki: moshennichestvo ili vzyatochnichestvo //Zakonnost'. 2013. ¹1. S. 35-38
3. Gorbatovich D. O sootnoshenii moshennichestva i nezakonnogo predprinimatel'stva, sovershennogo s ispol'zovaniem tovarnogo znaka // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2013. ¹3. S. 21-24.
4. Susloparov A.V., Tarbagaev A.N. Otvetstvennost' za nepravomernyy dostup k komp'yuternoy informatsii: ugolovno-pravovoy i administrativno-pravovoy aspekty // Vestnik Omskogo universiteta «Seriya Pravo». 2012. ¹2. S. 188-194.
5. Boytsov A.I. Prestupleniya protiv sobstvennosti. – SPb.: Izd-vo «Yuridicheskiy tsentr Press». 2002. S. 388.
6. Dikova N.V. Osobennost' rassledovaniya prestupleniy, sovershaemykh s ispol'zovaniem elektronnykh plastikovykh sredstv i sistem // Avtoref. .. kand. yurid. nauk. – Voronezh. 2011. S. 12.
7. Malumov G. Moshennicheskie deystviya v sfere kreditovaniya // Pravo i ekonomika. 2008. ¹3. S. 55-64.
8. Shesler A. Moshennichestvo: problemy realizatsii zakonodatel'nykh novell // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2013. ¹2. S. 67-71.
9. Tyunin V. «Restrukturizatsiya» ugolovnogo zakonodatel'stva ob otvetstvennosti za moshennichestvo // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2013. ¹2. S. 35-41.
10. Savkina M.A. Ugolovno-pravovaya okhrana ekonomicheskikh interesov // Avtoref. .. kand. yurid. nauk. – N.-Novgorod. 2006. S. 10-14.
11. Stepanov-Egiyants V.G. Sovremennaya ugolovnaya politika v sfere bor'by s komp'yuternymi prestupleniyami // Rossiyskiy sledovatel', 2012. ¹24. S. 43-46.
12. Skoblikov P.A. Sovremennye problemy vozmeshcheniya vreda litsam, postradavshim ot prestupleniy, i zakonodatel'noe reshenie // Zakon. 2012. ¹8. S. 87-92.
13. Levshits D.Yu. Ugolovnaya otvetstvennost' za finansovoe moshennichestvo po zakonodatel'stvu Rossii i zarubezhnykh stran // Avtoref. .. kand. yurid. nauk. – M., 2007. S. 21.
14. Aryamov A.A. K voprosu ob obshchestvennoy opasnosti strakhovogo moshennichestva i ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti za nego // Biblioteka kriminalista. 2012. ¹2. S. 5-9.
15. Moyle A., Pershin A. Vidy ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti za poddelku dokumentov v FRG // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2010. ¹5. S. 47-51.
16. Timoshin N.V. Novye normy o moshennichestve v UK RF: rekomendatsii po primeneniyu // Ugolovnyy protsess. 2013. ¹1. S. 12-13.
17. Klepitskiy I. Imushchestvennye prestupleniya v ugolovnom prave Rossii i FRG // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2013. ¹1. S. 38.
18. Gabov A.V., Molotnikov A.E. Problemy pravovogo regulirovaniya strakhovaniya otvetstvennosti rukovoditeley khozyaystvennykh obshchestv // Zakon. 2012. ¹9. S. 162-178.
19. Martynenko S.M. Vzyskanie ubytkov s direktorov kompaniy. VAS RF uvelichil shansy kreditorov na pobedu // Arbitrazhnaya praktika. 2013. ¹10. S. 60-66.
20. Gabov A.V. Ob otvetstvennosti chlenov organov upravleniya yuridicheskikh lits // Vestnik Vysshego Arbitrazhnogo suda RF. 2013. ¹7. S. 36-79.
21. Gavlo V.K., Belitskiy V.Yu. Problemy izucheniya sposobov soversheniya moshennichestv, deystvuyushchikh po printsipu «finansovykh» piramid // Rossiyskiy sledovatel', 2012, ¹1, S. 15-17.
22. Mestnikov V.A. Bor'ba s korporativnym moshennichestvom v SShA // Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya. 2009. ¹4. S. 72-81.