Author

Botvin I.V.

Title of article

Problems of distinguishing infliction of property damage through false pretence or abuse of confidence from fraud and its types

Section

Section 12. The problems of legal science and law enforcement practice: young researchers’ view

Issue, year

3 (33) 2015

Abstract

The problem issues of criminal classification of infliction of property damage through false pretence or abuse of confidence and fraud are considered. There are some differences in these crimes, though the norms fixing such crimes are in the same chapter and trespass on the same object – property relations; their modus operandi is false pretence and abuse of confidence, and their legislative structure is formulated as material corpus delicti. Distinguishing fraud from the infliction of property damage is carried out basing on the analysis of corpus delicti. Some criteria for distinguishing such crimes are defined. Distinguishing the consequences caused by these crimes is conducted. The issue of correlation between the terms “lost profit” and “loss of the thing due” is considered. It’s concluded that the term “loss of the thing due” is narrower than the first one, so it should be used since it is more accurate for describing the essence of the damage in the corpus delicti provided by the Article 165 of the RF Criminal Code. Though such corpus delicti differ both in subjective character of false pretence and abuse of confidence and in mechanism of committing these crimes, the distinctive features of considered crimes are still disputed over. The author supposes that the above-mentioned differences are insignificant for classifying the considered crimes and they do not hamper to unite these crimes into one norm. A new wording of the Article 159 of the RF Criminal Code is proposed.

Keywords

infliction of property damage, false pretence and abuse of confidence, fraud, types of fraud, criteria for distinguishing corpus delicti.

References

1. Khabarov A.V. Prestupleniya protiv sobstvennosti: vliyanie grazhdansko-pravovogo regulirovaniya. Kand. Diss. [Crimes against property: the impact of civil regulation. Cand. Diss.]. Ekaterinburg, 1999. 213 p.

2. Eliseev S.A. Prestupleniya protiv sobstvennosti po ugolovnomu zakonodatel’stvu Rossii. Dokt. Diss. [Crimes against property under the criminal legislation of Russia. Doct. Diss.]. Tomsk, 1999. 337 p.

3. Kostrova M. Krupnyy razmer i krupnyy ushcherb po UK RF: yazykovyy aspekt [Large size and large-scale damage of the Criminal Code: the language aspect]. Zakonnost’ – Legality, 2001, no. 10, pp. 25-28.

4. Perch N.V. Nepoluchenie dolzhnogo kak vid imushchestvennogo ushcherba (na primere st. 165 UK RF): ponyatie, vliyanie na otvetstvennost’ i kvalifikatsii. Kand. Diss. [Failure to obtain proper as a kind of property damage (for example, Art. 165 of the Criminal Code): the concept, the impact on the responsibility and qualifications. Cand. Diss.]. Moscow, 2003. 216 p.

5. Bakradze A.A. K voprosu o dekriminalizatsii st. 165 UK RF [On the issue of decriminalization of Art. 165 of the Criminal Code]. Available at: http://www.crimpravo.ru/blog/1810.html (Accessed 5 February 2014).