In follow-up in the crime is a deliberate. Participation of two or more persons as a sign of complicity. Group of persons by prior agreement

Complicity in a crime

intentional joint participation of two or more persons in the commission of a deliberate crime (Art. 32 of the Criminal Code). From the objective side of S. in p. It can be characterized by both action and inaction of accomplices.

The objective features of S. in P. Recently, firstly, participation in the same crime of two or more persons, secondly, unity or community of accomplices. It is composed of three elements: a) a crime is committed by common, mutually determined and mutually complementary efforts of several persons:

b) a criminal result achieved by joint activities of accomplices is common to them, one; c) a criminal result (in crimes with the material composition of the crime) or the very fact of the commitment of Acts (in crimes with the formal composition) is in causal connection with the actions of each of the partners.

From the subjective side of S. in p. It is characterized by the presence of accomplices only intentional guilt (intent comparison). Intent at S. in p. Can be both direct and indirect. At the same time, the mental attitude should be distinguished by the consequences of the criminal act committed in the complicity and the mental attitude of the partner to the very fact of their accession to the criminal activities of others. In the first case, the fault of the partners can act as in the form of direct and indirect intent. For example, two of the hooligan motives are thrown into the third river, not wanting, but consciously allowing his death. They are responsible for murder with indirect intent committed in complicity. And if someone fourth raised them to this, not wanting death, then he must be responsible for the complicity in the murder, perfect with indirect intent. In the second case, the face wishes to take part in the commission of a crime. Without such a desire there is no complicity.

The intellectual moment of intellect of the partner includes: a) awareness of a socially dangerous nature of his own act: b) awareness of the public danger of the act of other partners (at least one more); c) foresight of the joint criminal result. The volitional moment of intent forms the desire to jointly achieve a criminal result or his conscious assumption or an indifferent attitude towards it. S. in p., Thus, perhaps only in an intentional crime (Art. 32 of the Criminal Code). Cases of careless concerning the damage of the Criminal Code does not relate to S. in p.

S. in p. Always specifically. It is impossible to talk about S.V. "In general," it is possible only in specific crimes.

Form S. in p. - This is the structure of the link between two or more persons who make a deliberate crime. According to the method of combining joint efforts of accomplices, there are two forms of S. in P: a) Simple (SOCI-Cleaning or Sovication);

b) Complex (complicity with role separation).

Simple S. in and. It is characterized by the fact that all accomplices are executors of a crime: each of them makes actions containing signs of this composition of the crime. For a simple S. in p. It is characterized by a group way of committing a crime. Since each of the partners is a crime performer. A simple complicity is also called conciliance (or sovynotic).

Enforcement assumes the agreement of partners, their collusion. It may arise before the beginning or during the crime. The subjective connection between the co-valves is characterized by: a) knowledge of the co-operations of other crime accomplices; b) the realization that this activity is united with the actions of other partners and is directed. As well as the last, on the commission of the same crime. The intent of an ordinary single artist is added to the consciousness that he commits a crime together with another person (persons). With the core, each partner independently responds to the appropriate article of the special part of the Criminal Code without reference to Art. 33 Criminal

Complicated S. in P. Characterized by topics. that the actions that make directly the composition of a specific crime. Not all accomplices are performed, but only some or one of them. Along with the performer, the crime is involved or organizer, or an incitement, or a package or one of them. This form of complicity is characterized by a relatively complex relationship structure between accomplices: Some are perpetrators of a crime. Others organize them, the third declines the artist to make a criminal act or promote it.

As for the types of complicity (in the literature on criminal law, some authors refer them to the forms of S. in paragraph.), Among them should be distinguished:

a) S. in p. without prior agreement; b) S. in paragraph. According to the preliminary agreement: c) committing a crime with an organized group: d) committing a crime by the criminal community (criminal organization). These species S. in p. Differ from each other degree of cohesion of accomplices.

S. in paragraph. Without prior agreement, this is an intentional joint participation of several persons in the commission of a crime without prior about the agreement. This is the simplest and - in some cases - the least dangerous species of S. in p. Accession to the criminal activity of other persons can be either in the process of implementing criminal act or by agreement. Implemented at the time of its commission. Most often, S. in p. Without prior arbitrariness, there is a basis in the form of joint venture (this is S. in p. There is a crime by a group of persons, part 1 of Art. 35 of the Criminal Code). The subjective relationship between accomplices here is minimal and is limited to the knowledge of one partner about the joining criminal activity of the other. The commission of a crime by a group of persons as a qualifying circumstance is included, in particular, in the murder compositions (part 2 of article 105 of the Criminal Code), the intentional causing the grievous and secondary gravity of harm to health (h. SST 111, Part 2 of Art. 112uk), rape (Part 2 of Art. 131 of the Criminal Code), violent action of a sexual nature (Part 2 of Art. 132 of the Criminal Code), hooliganism (part 2 of Article 213).

SV P. According to the preliminary agreement (qualified complicity), there is a place in cases where several persons agree on a joint crime in advance. This arrangement may concern different parties to criminal activities: places. time, method, means and instruments of the crime, hiding its traces, etc. Subjective connection and organization here is higher than in the previous form. What says, as a rule, is about a higher degree of public danger of the specified species S. in paragraph. 2 tbsp. The 35 Criminal Code is distinguished by such a type of group criminal act, as a crime of a group of persons by prior agreement. This feature as a qualifying circumstance is included in many compounds of a crime against life and health, personal freedom, sexual integrity and sexual freedom, property, in the field of economic activity, against public security and public order, etc.

When the Criminal Code speaks of a crime of a group of persons by a preliminary conspiracy, he does not directly indicate what form S. in p. ("Simple" or "complex") meant. Judicial practice comes from the fact that in such a crime, its participants act as co-valves. Characteristic for S. in n. In general, the signs here are complemented by such as: a) the direct participation of each of the accomplices in the implementation of actions that form an objective side of the specific composition of the crime; b) Knowledge of each participant of a group crime that other performers (co-valves) are involved in the crime, and that their actions are related to its own, and the crime itself is committed by joint efforts of all participants. However, it should be noted that at S. in p. With a preliminary agreement, not only social comprehension may occur, but also the complicity in the close sense of the word (with the distribution of roles). However, this will not be considered a group crime.

The commission of a crime with an organized group, under which a sustainable group of persons are understood in advance for the commission of one or more crimes (part 3 of Art. 35 of the Criminal Code), significantly increases the social danger of the deed. The originality of an organized group consists of a sign of sustainability meaning that participants in such a group unites. As a rule, a system of systematic joint commitment as identical, homogeneous. So heterogeneous criminal acts for a sufficiently long time. Such a group involves the preliminary comganizes of its members. Begging in the pre-learning process, more or less strong connections are established. This allows the members of the Group in advance to coordinate the highlights of the alleged crime in advance, to agree on the plan of its commission, the division of the roles of the participants, and there is a place, time, methods of crime and hiding its traces, take certain preparatory actions, etc. The organized group may consist of co-aggregates, but most often in the process of a preliminary arbitraration between members of such a group, the role is distributed and some of them can act as organizers, other accomplices, the third - immediate performers. However, this technical distribution of roles does not affect the legal assessment of their actions. All participants in the organized group are recognized by the performers and respond independently according to the appropriate article of the special part of the Criminal Code.

Committing a crime by the criminal community (a criminal organization) under which a cohesive organized group (organization) is understood to commit hard or especially grave crimes, or the unification of organized groups created for the same purposes (part 4 of Art. 35 of the Criminal Code) - the most The dangerous species of S. in p. It is called S. in a special kind (lat. Sui Generis).

They are characterized by a significantly higher degree of sustainability of organizational relations and cohesion of persons, their components. Much more complex is their internal structure. The purpose of creating such communities is, as a rule, a long-term criminal activity (with an emphasis on committing grave and especially grave crimes), which is planned, is managed. In the course of its preparation and implementation, the roles are distributed, the sustainable forms of criminal relationships are developing, the organizers (managers) performing the management functions play a very important role.

The union of organized groups, created in order to commit hard and especially grave crimes, is a kind of criminal community. consisting of relatively autonomous sustainable groups, which are created as its structural divisions and are combined under general guidance. Given the increased danger of criminal communities (criminal organizations), the fact of the creation of such a community (organization) is criminalized, as well as leadership or the structural divisions, as well as the creation of the unification of the organizers, managers or other representatives of organized groups in order to develop plans and conditions For grave and especially grave crimes (part 1, Art. 210 of the Criminal Code). In accordance with Part 5 of Art. 35 Criminal Code The person who created an organized group or criminal community (criminal organization)

or led them, subject to criminal responsibility for their organization and leadership in cases provided for by the relevant articles of the special part of the Criminal Code (for example, under Part 1 of Art. 208, part 1 of article 209. Part 1 of Art. 210), as well For all crimes committed by the organized by a group or criminal community (criminal organization), if they were covered by its intent. Other participants of an organized group or criminal community (criminal organization) are criminalized for participating in them in cases provided for in the relevant articles of the special part of the Criminal Code, as well as for crimes, in the preparation or commission of which they participated.

Eyager E.F.

Encyclopedia lawyer. 2005 .

Watch what is "complicity in a crime" in other dictionaries:

In the most general form, these are various cases of committing a criminal act by several persons. In modern legal systems, more narrow definitions can be used. So, according to the Russian criminal law, the comparison is understood as intention ... ... Wikipedia

Complicity in a crime - Under the Russian criminal law (Art. 32 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), intentional joint participation of two or more persons in the commission of a deliberate crime. Supporters of the crime, along with the Contractor, recognize the organizer, instigator and accomplice. Artist ... ... Legal encyclopedia

Under art. 32 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, intentional joint participation of two or more persons in the commission of an intentional crime. Objective signs of S. in p. They are that: a) two or more persons participate in the crime; b) the actions of each of them are ... ... Legal Dictionary - under Art. 32 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, intentional joint participation of two or more persons in the commission of an intentional crime. Objective signs of S. in p. They are that: a) two or more persons participate in the crime; b) the actions of each of them are ... ... Big Law Dictionary

Complicity in a crime - Intentional joint participation of two or more persons in the commission of an intentional crime (Art. 32 of the Criminal Code). In the theory of criminal law, objective signs of complicity are allocated (participation of two persons, sharing actions) and subjective (compatibility of intent, ... ... Dictionary of main criminal procedure concepts and terms

Complicity in a crime - Under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Art. 32), intentional joint participation of two or more persons in the commission of an intentional crime. Signs of complicity: Each of the partners is an afflicted subject of crime, i.e. sane individual who reached the age ... ... Big Law Dictionary

Complicity in a crime - Intentional joint participation of two or more persons in the commission of a deliberate crime is recognized as a crime.

Regulations.

The foundations and limits of responsibility of partners

Types of accomplices

Forms of complicity

The concept of complicity in a crime

Main questions

1. PPVS of the Russian Federation of 10.06.2008 N 8O judicial practice of consideration of criminal cases on the organization of the criminal community (criminal organization).

2. PPPS of the Russian Federation of June 15, 2004 No. 11 on judicial practice in cases of crimes stipulated by Articles 131 and 132 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. p.10.

3. PAP of the Russian Federation of 18. 11. 2004 No. 23 on judicial practice on unlawful entrepreneurship and legalization (laundering) of cash or other property acquired by criminal means. P.19.20.

4. PPVS of the Russian Federation from 27. 12. 2002 No. 29 on judicial practice in theft, robbery and scattering. p. 8-15.

5. PPVS of the Russian Federation from 10. 02. 2000 No. 6 on judicial practice on bribery and commercial bribery. p.13.

6. PPVS of the Russian Federation from 14. 02. 2000 No. 7 on judicial practice on cases of minor crime. p. 9.

7. PPVS of the Russian Federation of 02/14/2000 No. 8 on introducing the Federal Assembly of the Law of the Law "On Amendments to Article 35 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation" to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation.

8. PPVS of the Russian Federation dated January 27, 1999 No. 1. On judicial practice on murder cases (Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). p.10.

9. PPPT RF of 17.01. 1997 No. 1 on the practice of applying the laws of liability for banditism. p. 2-4

10. PPVS of the Russian Federation of 4.05. 1990 No. 3 on judicial practice on extortion. P.14.

Literature.

1. Burchak F.G. The doctrine of complicity on the Soviet criminal law. Kiev, 1969;

2. Galiakbarov R.R. Group crime. - Sverdlovsk, 1973;

3. Zyryanov V.N. Connection in the service committed in the law enforcement. Stavropol, 1999;

4. Kovalev M.I.. Complicity in a crime. Part one. - Sverdlovsk, 1960;

5. Kozlov A.P.. Complicity: traditions and reality. - SPB., 2001;

6. The course of Soviet criminal law. T. 2. - M., 1970;

7. Telnov P.F.. Responsibility for complicity in a crime. - M., 1974.

8. Criminal law of Russia. Part overall. Textbook for universities. Ed. L.L.

Kruglikova - M.: 2005.

9. Yucenko B.V., Semchenkov I.P.Actual problems of legislative regulation of complicity in a crime // Russian Justice. - 2005. - №5.

Thus, this activity is intentional, intentional joint, action involutions should be at least two, this activity only about the deliberate crime. Persons who jointly commit a crime are called partners. The law consolidated four types of accomplices, this is: performer, organizer, instigator and accomplice. According to the nature of the association (crossing in a crime) to jointly commit an unlawful act, the law calls four forms of complicity: a group of persons, a group on a preliminary conspiracy, an organized group, a criminal organization. In addition, there is a simple and complicated complicity. Equipment (sovication) and complicity with the separation of roles.

Such is the formula of a modern understanding of complicity, and this is fixed in Art. 32 Criminal Code. Concise and simple. However, is it indisputable?

Listen to the example.

"Three hunters - A., B. and V. - returned home. They saw away the peasant, smoking the tube. A. appealed to V. with a proposal to show his art and get into the peasant's tube. B. agreed, but he put the condition to B. put the shoulder for the rifle. Consent was obtained. Followed shot; The bullet, however, did not get into the phone, but in his head, and the peasant was killed.

How to determine the responsibility of these three actors? ".

I remind you to the formula of complicity: intentional, joint participation in the performance of only a deliberate crime.

According to the rules of qualification, based on the consequences, the modern investigator qualifies the act as a careless murder - Art. 109 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, with the maximum sentence in the form of three years of imprisonment. Following the modern interpretation, the question of complicity will disappear, as such is impossible in a careless crime. However, there will be such a position of the law enforcement with the principles of the criminal law: the principles of guilt, legality and justice.

The actions of the perpetrators, as you understand, cannot be viewed as execution by each of them careless murder due to the fact that there is only one action and one result that excludes the multiplicity of execution.

It is impossible here and careless complicity, since it is excluded by law and the traditional attitude towards the state of the theory of criminal law. Unacceptable and impunity of these persons by virtue of their sufficiently high public danger.

This example was first driven by N. D. Sergeyevsky and duplicated by A.N. Train. There are still no appropriate qualifications about the actions:

And such examples when criminal law is powerless when meeting with socially dangerous acts, in practice and in the literature many.

In the pre-revolutionary theory, the institution of complicity caused a lot of discussion.

The main subject of the dispute is the concept of accusability of complicity, i.e., the dependence of the responsibility of accomplices from the responsibility of the Contractor.

A number of pre-revolutionary scientists, for example I. Ya. Foignitsky, believed that the responsibility of partners who did not fulfill the responsibility of the crime, contradict the principles of guilt and the causal bond. Therefore, during the argument of acts of several persons, each should be punished independently within its own guilt and contribution to causing damage.

However, the overwhelming majority of Russian scientists proved the presence of a subjective and objective connection with the commission of a crime of all accomplices and argued that complicity cannot be reduced to the simple amount of acts of partners, and is a new criminal education.

In the Soviet period, the first regulatory definition of complicity was given in the leading basis on the criminal law of the RSFSR (1919) and all subsequent "basics" and codes.

Problems of complicity in a crime are the subject of close attention of Russian criminals and now. In the period from 1997 to 2007, the number of identified persons who had committed a crime in the group ranges from 320,000 - 360,000. The increase in crime during the formation of modern economic relations, forcing specialists and legislative bodies to actively work in this direction.

The complicity Institute is one of the most difficult in criminal law.

Nowadays, a special ch is devoted to this section of criminal law. 7 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Art. 32 - 36). The study of this type of dangerous behavior is caused by the fact that the crime can be committed by several subjects. This circumstance requires special regulation of the terms of responsibility of persons participating in a crime.

Increased public danger of complicity due to:

Participation in a crime of several persons allows you to carefully disguise the crimes, which makes it difficult for the work of law enforcement agencies for their suppression;

Various unions (groups) are often on the path of committing many crimes;

In groups, for example, the efforts of several persons it is easier to commit a crime and cause damage, which is tangible and deeper will affect the protection objects. That is why participation in the deed several persons, with other things being equal, causes an increase in the public danger of the very encroachment compared to similar encroachment by a separate person.

Criminal legislation does not create a special reason for responsibility for complicity.

They remain committing an act containing all signs of the crime provided for by criminal law.

The peculiarity of the basis of responsibility in complicity is formulated by the additional rules provided for by ch. 7 (Art. 32 - 36 of the Criminal Code). These norms take into account that directly actions covered by objective signs of the composition, accomplices in some cases do not fulfill, and their dangerous behavior (organization, incitement, the false crime) is carried out independently before, during or after the executive execution of the crime.

As a special form of criminal activities, complicity is characterized by a number of objective and subjective signs.

Increase in the crime recognizes intentional joint participation of two or more persons in the commission of a deliberate crime.

Comment on Article 32

The legislative concept of complicity, enshrined in Art. 32 of the Criminal Code, indicates four main signs:

1) Two objective signs: participation in a crime of two or more persons and sharing participation;

2) Two subjective signs: intentional participation and participation in an intentional crime.

Participation in a crime of two and more persons It assumes that these persons must correspond to the signs of a common subject of crime (to be sane individuals who have reached the age specified in Art. 20 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The commission of a crime through the use of other persons not subject to criminal liability by age, insaneness or other circumstances does not form complicity, and the actions of the perpetrator should be qualified as actions of the direct executor of the crime (Part 2 of Art. 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). It is this position that it is set forth in paragraph 12 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 27, 2002 N 29 "On judicial practice on theft, robbery and scattering" and in paragraph 9 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of February 14, 2000 N 7 "On judicial practice on criminal cases of minors", which states that the commission of a crime using a person who is not subject to criminal liability due to age (Article 20 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) or insanity (Article 21 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), not Creates complicity. At the same time, it should be noted that when resolving the courts of specific cases of uniformity in solving this issue there is no question. Thus, in determining the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 18, 2006, N 35-O06-14 states that the position according to which the actions of the perpetrator cannot be considered to be perfect by the group of persons in the preliminary conspiracy in connection with the recognition of the second person inequiencies, it was not based on the law.

The above Rule on participation in a crime of two or more persons belongs to crimes with a special subject. However, the performer (co-valve) in such crimes can only be a person corresponding to the signs of a special subject. Other persons can only be organizers, instigators or accomplices in a crime with a special subject.

Share of participation Indicates the functional connection between the acts of accomplices. They contribute (help) to each other in committing a crime. At the same time, the harmful effects of the crime are associated with a causal relationship with joint activities of accomplices. Therefore, complicity is impossible after committing a crime. After committing a crime, it is possible not to complicity, but "tapstance" to the crime, some species of which are entrusted with the cases provided for in the articles of the special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: Art. 174 of the Criminal Code - the legalization of income from the crime committed by other persons; Art. 175 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - the acquisition or sale of property produced by criminal means; Art. 316 of the Criminal Code - the covering of crimes.

The lack of functional communication excludes complicity. For example, a person who was present at robbery, but not committed any actions aimed at creating property, can be recognized as partner of robbery only, provided that it somehow helped the robberies in the commission of crimes (for example, the threats expressed by others have reinforced Partner).

It's believed that intentional participation Not only means the awareness of the face of participation in a crime and the volitional focus on its commission, but also implies the minimum bilateral subjective connection of accomplices, awareness of the fact of committing a crime in complicity, i.e. Fact assistance (help) other partners. It is also traditionally believed that complicity with a unilateral subjective bond is impossible, although other positions were also expressed in the theory of criminal law. In practice, such situations rarely happen. The tritomatic example is the role of Yago in the murder of Othello Dzentemon (tragedy of W. Shakespeare "Othello").

Complicity with a unilateral subjective link should be distinguished from complicity in complicity, which entails responsibility as a simple complicity in a crime (for example, incitement to a message in murder can be qualified depending on the circumstances of the case as aiding in murder or incitement to it).

In addition, it should be taken into account the positions of Part 5 of Art. The 35 Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, according to which the person who created an organized group (community, organization) or he managed, is subject to criminal responsibility for all the crimes committed by this group (community, organization), if they were covered by its intent. It does not matter the fact that the Contractor knew about the role of such an organizer.

Complicity Perhaps only B. deliberate crime. Careless accomplishment of harm to complicity is not excluding causing due to negligence of the same consequences to all of its participants (for example, a collision of cars, which caused the death of a person, happened due to the fault of two drivers, each of which crossed the line of road markings, separating the oncoming traffic lanes - By responsibility for violation of traffic rules, the resulting death of the victim can be attracted by both driver).

On the one hand, it is believed that incitement to violation of the rules, which caused serious consequences by negligence, does not entail criminal liability (for example, the head demands that the driver subordinate to him exceed the speed of movement, and the driver, violating the rules, causes grave harm). On the other hand, the organization of causing the other face of serious consequences by negligence, if there is intent aimed at causing such consequences, qualifies as actions of the performer of a deliberate crime (a variety of mediocre harm), which does not exclude the responsibility of the direct injury for a careless crime.

The complicity in a deliberate crime suggests that the intent of partners covers the main circumstances characterizing the crime. With complicity, there is a realization of the public danger of their own actions, as well as actions of the executive of a crime. The intent of partners should also be covered by the socially dangerous consequences of the acts committed by the Contractor, and the causal relationship between the act and the consequence. Finally, accomplices are aware of the main signs inherent in the subject of the crime.

Complicity in a crime from the subjective side is characterized intentional wine Participants. This form of mental activities of accomplices, as noted above, is manifested in their attitude to all signs of the composition of the crime, including qualifying. Therefore, the qualifying signs of the composition of the crime can be accompanied by accomplices only if they establish intent in relation to these signs.

Motivation of the behavior of accomplices may be different, which does not interfere with the establishment of the fact of complicity in a crime, but may affect the qualifications of the act of a particular partner, if he was not known to the motives, which were guided by another surplus of crime (provided that these motives are a sign of the crime composition) .

The main importance of the compacious institution is that it allows you to involve persons who have not committed directly acts prohibited by articles of the special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, but only those who promoted these acts. In itself, the complicity in the crime does not relate to the number of aggravating circumstances. The aggravating circumstance is recognized only by the commission of a crime in complication, expressed in specific forms (a group of persons, a group of persons by preliminary conspiracy, an organized group or a criminal community, a criminal organization).

25.7. Complicity in a crime

A significant number of crimes is performed by several subjects. In this case, we are talking about complicity in a crime.

Investibly joint participation of two or more persons in the commission of deliberate crime (Art. 32 of the Criminal Code).

Participation in a crime of two or more persons suggests that they all have achieved a criminal liability established by the law, as well as be charged during the crime. Therefore, the commission of a socially dangerous act, together with unbearable or juvenile, does not form complicity.

For complicity it is required that the activities of the Partners joint. The concept of singular means the mutual conditionality of the action of accomplices and the consequence for them. However, unites should be not only an objective, but also a subjective sign of complicity. The joint action of accomplices in a subjective aspect is due to the coincidence of the interests of accomplices, the unity of mental community.

Actions of all partners of crime are intentional.The complicity is excluded in careless crimes. Consequently, from the subjective side, it is determined not only by the subjective link between accomplices, but also a certain mental attitude of the person to the act and its consequences. Accordingly, only intentional joint participation in the same deliberate crime is recognized as comparison.

The different degree of consistency of the actions of partners allows you to allocate two forms of complicity: complicity without prior agreement and complicity with a preliminary agreement.

To complicity without prior agreement The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation refers to the commission of a group of persons, if two or more performer jointly participated in its commission, this is the least dangerous and low-prolonged form of complicity. For it, it is characterized by a minimum degree of consistency (which is due to the impossibility of a conviction until the moment of the crime) and it is characterized by the accession of participants to the executor of the crime only during its commission. As an example, you can call murder in a collective brawl, rape and other encroachments on personality.

Complicity with preliminary agreement It assumes the existence of a conviction before the start of the action constituting the objective side of the crime, i.e. Before the start of the acts provided for in the articles of the special part of the Criminal Code. The different degree of consistency between accomplices within the framework of this form of complicity allows the following varieties to be distinguished: a) a group of persons under the preliminary conspiracy; b) organized group; c) the criminal community (criminal organization) - Art. 35 Criminal

Group with preliminary collusion There is a place when the participants agree on the joint committee of the crime. The agreement (collusion) can be expressed in verbal, writing or being the result of silent consent. Crimes committed in prior agreement by a group of persons increase the punishability of those perpetrators. The crime is recognized as perfect on the preliminary conspiracy, if it participated in persons who are pre-contracting about the joint commitment.

Organized group It is characterized by a greater degree of cohesion between the participants: the presence of the leadership, the development of a crime plan, the distribution of roles and actions to implement the work out of the plan. For her, professionalism and sustainability are characteristic: accomplices, as a rule, are united in order to make not one, but a number of crimes. The organized group is more often committed by crimes in economic and economic spheres. This kind of complicity is considered to be a circumstance that increases responsibility for the deed.

Criminity (a criminal organization) - the most dangerous of all the complications mentioned above, it represents sustainable, cohesive, organized group Persons created for grave or especially grave crimes, or the association of organized groups created for the same purposes. Under the stability of the criminal community means the presence of long or permanent links between its members, as well as specific methods of preparing and committing crimes. Criminal communities are created, in particular, to occupy a drug business. The very fact of organizing a criminal community or leadership them, as well as participation in it entail criminal liability.

The new form of the criminal community is to organize or participate in illegal armed formations which means both the organization of such formations, i.e. The organization of armed associations, team education and intentional actions performed in their composition. In this case, criminal liability increases for intentional actions committed in the composition of illegal formations, if they entailed the death of people.

Types of accomplices. Depending on the nature of the implementation of the accomplices, partners are divided into artist, organizer, instigator and accomplices.

Contractor A person who directly committed the crime is recognized or directly participating in his commitment together with other persons.

Organizer - This is a person who has organized a crime committing or leading it, as well as a person who has created an organized group or a criminal community or led them.

Increased One who is considered by persuasion, bribing, threats or other way to commit a crime, i.e. caused from another person (performer) determination to make a specific crime.

Accomplice - the person who has contributed to the commission of crime by advice, instructions, the provision of appropriate funds or eliminating obstacles to the implementation of the act; This is also the one who promised to hide criminals in advance, tools, funds and traces of a crime, items produced by criminal means.

Introduction

According to the direct prescription of the law (Art. 32 of the Criminal Code) complicity in a crime - intentional joint participation of two or more persons in committing a crime. The fact that complicity is a deliberate joint criminal activity also testifies to the possibility of complicity only in intentional crimes. This provision indirectly follows from the law and is in parallel in practice the application of the rules of complicity in a crime.

"Intentional joint participation", pushing out of the content of intent in Art. 25 of the Criminal Code, first of all, understanding by each partner of a socially dangerous nature of his own behavior and a socially dangerous nature of the behavior of other partners (at least one of them) plus an understanding of the objective relationship of their behavior with the behavior of other partners (at least one ); secondly, the foresight of the criminal result from the United's effort; Third, the desire or intentional assumption that this result will be achieved just the paths of the addition of the efforts of all accomplices or at least the efforts of two of them.

From the above abstracts, it follows that the first two of them constitute the generality of the intellectual element of intent in complicity in a crime. In the theory of criminal law and the practice of applying the regulations on the complicity in the crime, he received the name of the mutual ignorance of accomplices (at least two of them) about the criminal nature of their behavior and interconnectedness of the latter. The third position displays the specifics of the volitional element of intent when complicity. In the theory and practice of criminal law, he received the name of the coherence of the will of the accomplices in relation to common criminal results for them. At the same time, the coherence of the will also contain the very addition of efforts, and their coordination towards achieving common and united for all obligations of the criminal result.

The named two subjective signs of complicity in a crime, that is, mutual awareness and coherence in the indicated understanding, directly and multigid flow from the law (Article 25, Art. 32 of the Criminal Procedure) and are determined by the originality of the causing factor in each specific form of manifestation of such criminal activities.

In connection with the foregoing, it is impossible to recognize the attempts of other interpretation of subjective signs of complicity in a crime. This primarily concerns the concept of the so-called minimum (one-sided) subjective connection, according to which for the existence of a crime is enough that the incitement to the accomplice knows the criminal activity of the contractor, and it is not at all necessary that the performer knows about their activities.

Consider in this work more detailed issues of complicity in criminal law.

The object of work is the criminal law of the Russian Federation. The subject is the form of complicity in a crime.

1. The concept of complicity and its form

The regulations about complication are concentrated in Chapter 7 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (in Art. 32-36). In art. 32 is given a scientific and practical definition of the very concept of complicity in a crime. It expresses the main signs of complicity, which reflect the concept adopted in Russia, formed by Russian legal scientists in the second half of the XIX century.

This definition sounds like this: "Intentional joint participation of two or more persons in the commission of a deliberate crime is recognized as a crime. This definition and all subsequent decisions of the law developing the main provisions of this general rule, fully comply with the key provisions of the resolution of the Seventh International Congress on Criminal Right.

There are several views at the very legal nature of the compacious institution. The most important attitudes that share them can be reduced to two main:

a) whether careless complicity is probably in a deliberate or careless crime;

b) whether the legal nature of the complicity of the Accessor is arises, i.e. whether it is based on the execution of the crime, or all the partners, despite their different role, are peculiar performers of a criminal act, or among them the central figure is the figure of the performer, and all the other accomplices are grouped around him, how would be his assistants?

The answer is in the text Art. 32 Criminal The law refers to the fact that compassionate part of several persons is recognized as complicated and only in an intentional crime. The clarity of this ruling finally excludes the careless complicity in an intentional or careless crime (this is the application of precisely statements about complicity in these circumstances).

The Criminal Code calls four types of partners: performer, organizer, instigator and accomplice. They all differ from each other for the forms and nature of participation in the crime. What criteria are based on their distinction?

In Article.35 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the types of complicity are displayed, which in form are both types of simple and types of complicated complicity. For example, such a form of complicity as an organized group may occur in a crime committed both in the form of compliance and in the form of complicity with the legal distribution of roles. In general, theoretically, it is possible to distinguish eight mixed compassion models built on the combination of its various shapes and species. All the same legislator, as well as judicial practice, individual types of complicity are found only in relation to the coincidence, excluding their presence in the event of complicity with the legal distribution of roles.

Group of persons. The crime is recognized as a perfect group of persons if two or more performer participated in his commitment without a prior agreement (Part 1 of Article 35 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The features of this type of complicity are as follows.

B-1st, the enforcement of the offense by the team of persons is permissible only by the presence of reporting in the Figure of Enforcement. B-2nd, among the co-executors there is no advance column, i.e. They previously did not convege on the general commitment to stand out an offense. As a rule, the enforcement of the offense by the team of persons (either equally as yet reported, the team of persons in the absence of an advance conspiracy) has a role in the options if the criminal act begins to carry out 1 with co-valves, and another performer, no one negotiating with the main one, adjoins it before Fixed criminal work, after which accomplices simultaneously lead a criminal act until the end.

So, for example, "the murder should recognize the perfect group of persons and in the case when in the process of committing one person aimed at intentional causing death, another person (other persons) was joined by the same purpose" On judicial practice in cases of Murder (Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation): According to one of the criminal cases, it was established that on the soil of the quarrel P. inflicted one blow by the body X. improvised wooden bat. Then M. took from P. Bit and inflicted one blow on the head and the body of X. After that, P. and M. transferred the victim X. From the storeroom to the kitchen, where M. Polen inflicted the victim two strikes and at least two blows by body. As a result of joint criminal actions, P. and M. followed the death of the victim X. The court reasonably recognized P. and M. The Summilizers of the murder committed by a group of individuals without prior arbitrariness.

Almost this type of complicity is extremely rare. The commission of a group of persons without a prior arbitrariness is envisaged as a qualifying feature, as a rule, in the compositions of crimes against life and health (p. "W" Part 2 of Article 105, paragraph. "A" Part 3 of Article 111, p. "G" Part 2 of Article 1212, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, etc.), as well as in some of the compositions of crimes against military service (Part 2 of Article 332, p. "A" Part 2 of Article 333, p. "A "Part 2 of Article 334 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, etc.). In other cases, the commission of a crime in the group of persons is a circumstance aggravating the punishment (para. "In" Part 1 of Article 63 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

In the absence of a preliminary agreement, the complicity is not excluded in a crime with the legal distribution of roles (for example, accidental eyewitness of the murder committed decides to assist the Contractor and gives it a knife, thereby becoming a boss of a crime). However, with this type of complicity, the legislator does not associate special legal consequences.

Group of persons by prior agreement. The crime is recognized as a perfect group of persons in a preliminary conspiracy, if it participated in persons who were in advance of the joint committee of the crime (part 2 of Article 35 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). In contrast to the previous type of compassion, in determining the group of persons by prior agreement, it is not said that only the criminal coincides can be founded. Because, if you adhere to the literal interpretation of the law, the crime of a group of persons by a preliminary conspiracy may occur, both in fact and in complicity with the legal distribution of roles. Nevertheless, in judicial practice, and after her, in the theory of criminal law, the restrictive interpretation of this type of complicity was traditional - the commission of a crime by a group of persons on the preliminary conspiracy is probably only in the form of excluding. At this circumstance, the Supreme Court of Russia repeatedly paid attention to the clarification of the Plenum and in decisions on specific criminal cases. Having recognized the face of the assignment of the murder, the court mistakenly qualified his actions as a murder committed by a group of persons on the preliminary conspiracy, since the immediate performer of the murder was one person. The murder, manifested in the immediate application of violence against the victim by one person, cannot be qualified as a committed by a group of persons by prior agreement. The complicity in the form of a complicity in the murder does not form a qualifying sign of the commission of a "group of persons by prior agreement". For example, in relation to the receipt of a bribe and commercial bribe, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation explained: "A bribe or subject of commercial bribery should be considered an acquired group of persons in a preliminary conspiracy, if two or more officials or two and more persons engaged in commercial functions participated in the crime or other organizations that adopted in advance about the general commitment of this crime through adoption of each of the members of the group of illegal remuneration for each of them (inaction) for the service in favor of the person who conveyed to the unlawful remuneration of the person or the persons delivered to them. For the stealing, robbery and The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation gave the following clarification of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation: "If the organizer, an instigator or the accompaniment did not directly participate in the commitment of someone else's property, committed by the performer of a crime cannot qualify as a committed by a group of persons under the preliminary conspiracy. Such a method, the basic difference of the category of persons according to the previous conspiracy agreement with the group in the category of category of persons consists only only in the precedent of the presence of an advance column among the co-values.

Preliminary Agreement - this agreement among accomplices about the general commitment of the offense, conquered up to the basis of the fulfillment of the impartial edge of the offense.

Credit partners is manifested in the gain of the settlement of contracts (agreements) about this, the fact that they will implement a specific criminal act. The presence of this will not necessarily, in order for accomplices with care and completeness, all the components of the estimated offense, created a detailed draft of its commission (role, period, guns, the victims, industrial separation of co-valves, etc.), the fact that In general, in this case, it is previously characteristic of the consecration of accomplices of the established category. More in general, the agreement lays a primitive look and with the aim of its presence pretty of this, the fact that the object of the accomplice agreement is considered to be the circumstance of the exclusion of a certain offense (death, rape, theft, etc.), the properties of the composition of which are recognized by any of the accomplices. There is no significant conspiracy model (pronounced, writing, with gestures), and besides the level of its advance and duration (the preparatory agreement is able to execute up to the basis of the authority of the offense or directly before the foundation of the offense, bring the type of long negotiations or an urgent agreement).

Credit is advanced, if someone possessed a role in advance, up to the basis of the authority of the offense, and directly, up to the basis of the operations of operations either, which are taken into account in the disposition of a special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the property of the properties of the impartial edge of the branch of the offense. Such a method, the preparatory agreement in the exercise of the offense is probably only in the period of manufacturing to the offense, up to the basis of the attempt in it. This is confirmed by Part 1 of Article 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, in accordance with which one with the configurations of the manufacture is an agreement in the exercise of an offense.

According to some categories of criminal cases, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation gave the following explanations of the concept of preliminary collusion: "The preliminary agreement on the murder believes the agreement manifested in any form of two or more persons held before the action of actions directly aimed at depriving the life of the victim. When qualifying actions guilty as The commission of the embezzlement of someone else's property of a group of persons in the preliminary conspiracy to the court should be found out if such a conspiracy of the partners had the place of action directly aimed at the embezzlement of someone else's property, was the agreement on the division of roles in order to implement criminal intent, as well as what particular action was made by each performer and other partners of the crime. In view of the fact that a group of persons in prior agreement is characterized by a higher degree of coherence of joint participation in a crime, this type of complicity has an increased public danger compared to a group of persons without Reductive Conduction.

Organized group. The crime is recognized as a leached organized group, if it is committed as a stable group of persons in advance to perform one or more crimes (Part 3 of Article 35 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). In principle, the organized group is a more dangerous species of a group of persons in a preliminary conspiracy, in which, unlike the latter, the accomplices do not agree in advance, and are contacted in advance to commit a crime. Nevertheless, the main difference of these types of comparison is the sign of the immutability that the organized group has, and does not have a group of persons by prior agreement. What to understand under the constancy of an organized group, the legislator does not interpret. Therefore, this assessment feature is traditionally the subject of interpretation by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Russia, as well as the criminal law doctrine.

Subsequently, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Russia has repeatedly applied to the question of the sustainability of an organized group, giving relevant clarifications in various categories of criminal cases. But every time the above-mentioned stability criteria, despite various variations in their description, in fact, remained the same. The group is considered to be sustainable, if there is a long time, has a criminal profile and the constant composition of the participants in advance of the functions in advance.

In general, the characteristic of the organized group given by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation is as follows: "As a rule, such a group scrupulously plans a crime, he prepares the murder tool in advance, shares the roles between the participants of the group;" Unlike a group of persons in advance about the joint committee of the crime The organized group is characterized, in particular, resistance, presence in its composition of the organizer (supervisor) and a previously developed plan for joint criminal activity, dividing functions between members of the Group in preparing a crime and execution of criminal intent.

The stability of the created category is able to speak not only the huge period of its life, the multipleness of the administration of the category by members of the category, however, and their technical staffing, the duration of preparation, including one offense, and besides other conditions (for example, a specialized organization of participants created Categories to indoors in order to withdraw cash (monetary earthenware) or other real values) "On huge practice according to the stealing processes, unformed and different. The formed category differs in the presence of the initiator (manager), the stability of the composition of category accomplices, distribution Roles among them the presence of preparing for an offense and directly committing "on taller practice according to the processes about the scam, assigning and squabble. The stability of the created category will be able to say a huge velocity period of its life, the multipleness of the execution of offenses by members of the category, their technical staffing and separation of roles among them, the duration of preparation, including the 1st offense, and other conditions (for example, a specialized organization of participants The established category on the sustainability of the organized group may indicate the presence of the organizer (supervisor), a long time interval of its existence, repeatedness of committing crime by members of the Group, their technical equipment, the distribution of roles between them, the duration of training even one crime, as well as other circumstances (for example, special training Participants of the organized group; "The organized group is characterized by stability, a higher degree of organization, distribution of roles, the presence of the organizer and (or) of the head.

The relatively long-term existence of the Group, which is achieved by planning and committing a group of usually several crimes, a certain number of which can be established in advance or not defined at all.

If the organized group is based on the commission of only one crime, the duration of the Group's existence is determined by the need of a scrupulous preparation of the planned crime, which requires the participants in the group of the commission of a whole complex of preparatory actions that stretch over time (for example, preparation for robber attack on collectors or illegal entrepreneurship).

For example, according to one of the criminal cases, the court as follows as follows the duration of the existence of an organized group: "The sustainability and cohesion of the gang testifies to the long period of its criminal activity. So, the court found that in the period from January 18 to February 12, 2013 a gang group Persons in different combination were made six robbery attacks. The constancy of the group of the group, meaning membership in the group of the same persons united for the preparation and commission of crimes more or less permanent composition. Since the legislator does not specifically define the numerical composition of the organized group, should be repeated from that the constancy of the group is achieved by participating in the preparation and commitment of all crimes at least two of the same accomplices.

Variable participants in crimes made in the composition of an organized group that are not permanent members, but aware of the fact of sustainability of the Group, are also responsible for the commission of a crime in the composition of an organized group (with the imputation of the corresponding qualifying feature).

So, according to one of the criminal cases, the court described the analyzed criterion: "The stability and organization of the headed L. and S. Gang testify to its cohesion, the stability, the close relationship between its members, who unconditionally obeyed them, implemented the functions of drivers and guards, participated in willed crimes. Members of the gang rested together, trained, each of them considered himself one of the "Ledevian , that is, a member of a single criminal group.

On the contrary, according to another criminal case, the court did not recognize as evidence of the presence of an organized group in the crimes of R. and K., convicted of the incomplete sale of narcotic drugs, the fact that convicts were actually in marriage (their marriage was not registered), lived in One apartment, together spent the vacation time, had a common budget.

The distribution of roles between the participants of the organized group is indicating that each of the group members exercises a common criminal function in the process of preparing or committing crimes. The distribution of roles can be as technical when all participants in the organized group are enforcement of crimes, but each of them performs some one's own part of criminal action in the process of training and committing crime and legal when one of the participants in the organized group is the executor of crimes, and All others perform the role of the organizer, instigator or accomplice.

Nevertheless, in whatever form of complicity did not have an organized group compulsory, its feature is the presence of a group of the actual crime organizer (head, initiator, leader).

The criminal specialization of the group is contained in the constancy of the forms and methods of criminal activities of the members of the Group (criminal profile), as well as in their special training, including technical equipment and special skills, to commit crimes of a certain species. In other words, this criterion for the stability of an organized group is optional. Often organized groups, especially a common orientation, have multilateral criminal interests and are formed to commit a wide variety of crimes that differ in both the nature and gravity (theft, rape, murders, hooliganism, sales of fake money, the use of substrate documents, etc. .).

Despite the fact that the commission of a crime by an organized group may occur both in the form of compliance and in the form of consideration with the legal distribution of roles, the view is firmly strengthened that all participants in the organized group, regardless of the nature of their participation in the crime , Must be recognized by the enforcement officers committed by the organized group, and be responsible for him without reference to Article.33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The participant of the organized group is criminally liable as a deliberator for a crime committed by the organized group in which he participated or who prepared. This belief has repeatedly emphasized the plenum of the Supreme Court of Russia, say: "When recognizing the murder of a perfect organized group of action of all participants, regardless of their role, the crime should be qualified as a reference to Article 33 of the Criminal Code" On judicial practice on murder (Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

In the theory of criminal law, this position is not always separated, since it is a legal appearance based on a mixture of complicity classifications on forms and types. A more significant level of coherence (coalization) of partners, expressed in the sustainability of their criminal activity, is associated with an artificial modification of the complex form of complicity in his simple form, which does not actually happen. The proof of this is that the person who created an organized group or led by it is recognized by the legislator not by the co-executive of the crime, but its organizer (part 3 of article 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). In fact, complicity in the form of aggregate is determined not by the membership of the person as part of an organized group as its permanent participant (unless, we are not talking about participation in the organized group as an independent part of the crime, for example, Article 208, 209 of the Criminal Code, etc. ), and the implementation of the crime, provided for by the special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, two or more performers, regardless of the degree of consistency (including sustainability) of their common criminal activity.

Sometimes this opinion is adhered to the Supreme Court of Russia in contradiction with the previously nominated position. For example, in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 27, 2007 No. 51 "On judicial practice on fraud, assigning and estrusing" is given an explanation that in an organized group of persons who committed someone else's property "may include persons who do not possess Powers by order, management or use of entrusted property, as well as on its delivery or storage, which were united in advance to perform one or more crimes. If there are grounds, they are responsible in accordance with Part 4 of Article 34 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation as the organizers, instigators or assignment accomplices . The decisions of courts on concrete criminal cases are also evidenced about the controversivity of judicial practice.

For example, in the spring of 2012 in Tyumen L. and S. on the basis of revenge for the fact that F. refused to pay them for the services provided for its protection from other criminal structures, as well as wanting to intimidate it and make the money again, decided to commit Attack on F. and harm him health. The execution of the crime, they commissioned L.V., having transferred one thousand US dollars as a remuneration. On April 30, 2012 in the morning, L.V., in accordance with the developed L. and S. plan, attacked F. and in advance with a pre-cooked metal mount inflicted the victim several blows on the head, intentionally causing him injuries that caused the causation of serious harm to his health.

The actions of L. Regional Court qualified as an organization of intentional causing grievous harm to health, life-threatening man committed by an organized group, i.e. under Part 3 of Article 33 and p. "A" Part 3 of Article 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The judicial board in criminal cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, having considered the case in cassation, recognized this qualifications properly.

If the person was not a member (member) of an organized group, but fulfilled organizer, incitement or postal functions in a crime committed by an organized group, such a person is not recognized as an organizer, but by the organizer, instigator or accomplice with a crime committed by an organized group. In particular, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation explained: "If the person raised another person or a group of persons to create an organized group to commit specific crimes, but did not directly participate in the selection of its participants, planning and preparation for committing crimes (crimes) or in their implementation His actions should be qualified as complicity in the commission of an organized group of crimes with reference to part fourth of Article 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Criminal community (criminal organization). The crime is recognized as a perfect criminal community (criminal organization) if it is committed by the organized groups organized by the Group or the union of organized groups operating under a single leadership, whose members are combined in order to jointly commit one or more grave or especially grave crimes to obtain directly or indirectly financially or other material Benefits (Part 4 of Article.35 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The criminal community (criminal organization), being the most dangerous type of complicity, in essence, is a kind of organized group, which differs from the last higher degree of coherence (coalization) of the criminal activities of partners, which is expressed in a more complex internal structure and specific purpose of the criminal community (criminal organization ).

Stripping from the legislative definition of the criminal community (a criminal organization), it is possible to distinguish its (its) objective and subjective signs. The objective features include:

) Combining partners to one of two forms: a structured organized group or the union of organized groups;

) The presence of such a group or unification of a single manual. Subjective features include: 1) setting to the specified group or union as an initial purpose of committing one or more grave or especially grave crimes; 2) The ultimate goal of the community activities (criminal organization) is obtaining directly or indirectly financial or other material benefits. The detailed characteristic of the symptoms of the criminal community is given in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 10.06.2010 No. 12 "On judicial practice of consideration of criminal cases on the organization of the criminal community (criminal organization) or participation in it (it)":

"Under a structured organized group, it is necessary to understand the group of persons in advance to perform one or more grave or especially serious crimes consisting of divisions (subgroups, links, etc.), characterized by the constancy of the composition and coherence of its actions. Structured organized group except The unified leadership is characterized by the consistency of its various divisions in order to implement common criminal intentions, the distribution of functions between them, the availability of possible specialization in carrying out specific actions in the commission of crime and other forms of ensuring the activities of the criminal community (criminal organization).

Near the skeletal division of an illegal society (criminal company), it is necessary to be aware of highly functional and (either) the regionally isolated category with 2 or the most persons (including the management of this category), which within and in coordination with the targets of the illegal society (criminal company ) Implements criminal work. Such skeletal branches associated with the purpose of the resolution of uniform issues of an illegal society (the criminal company) will not only be able to carry out single offenses (the cottage of bribes, fake paper, etc.), however, and carry out other problems aimed at providing the functioning of an illegal society (criminal company).

The unification of the established companies implies the presence of holistic management and stable relationships among other than the existing authorized groups, collective compilation of the plan and assistance in committing 1 or many severe or especially serious offenses, collective implementation of other operations associated with the functioning of such a union. "

The criminal law does not establish any legal differences between the concepts of the "criminal community" and "criminal organization", for which the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation drew attention. In the science of criminal law, however, there is an opinion that the term "criminal organization" is more consistent with the concept of a structured organized group, while the term "criminal community" characterizes the unification of organized groups, as a consolidated education of at least two independent organized groups, united for joint committing one or more crimes. The more complex internal structure of the criminal community (criminal organization), which allows the existence of this type of complicity in the form of a structured organized group consisting of separate divisions, or associations of at least two organized groups, dictates the doubling of the minimum number of participants in the criminal community (criminal organization) compared to Other types of complicity. The criminal community (criminal organization) can be formed by at least four people.

The presence of a structured organized group or unification of organized groups of a single manual means the implementation of organizational and (or) management functions against the criminal community (criminal organization) as a whole. It seems that this feature corresponds not only to the organizational activities of the head of the criminal community (criminal organization), but also the activities of persons coordinating (coordinating) criminal actions between several organized groups belonging to the criminal community (criminal organization) in order to jointly commit planned crimes, As well as the activities of persons who create sustainable bonds between different independently operating organized groups, including those who perform actions to combine such groups in order to implement joint actions to plan, commit one or more serious or especially grave crimes. At the same time, as noted by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation: "The leadership of the criminal community (criminal organization) can be carried out as uniquely by the head of the criminal community (criminal organization) and two and more persons who united for joint guidance (for example, the head of the criminal community (criminal organization ), head of the structural unit, head (leader) of an organized group). "

The primary legally significant goal of the criminal community (criminal organization) is the general commission of its members of one or more serious or especially grave crimes. It does not matter a specific type of crime, for which the criminal community (criminal organization) is organized, as well as their number.

The imperative condition is that such crimes should refer to the category of hard (Part 4 of Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) or especially hard (Part 5 of Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). This condition takes place in the case when the purpose of the criminal community (criminal organization) is a crime, which under normal circumstances is not a hard or particularly serious, but is recognized as such if it is committed by a group of persons, a group of persons by a preliminary conspiracy or an organized group. These qualifying features are also incriminated to members of the criminal community (criminal organization) committed a crime, which in the presence of these circumstances in the cases provided for by law goes to the category of grave or especially hard.

The ultimate legally significant goal of the criminal community (criminal organization) is to receive directly or indirectly financial or other material benefits. Accordingly, with explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation: "At the same time, under the direct receipt of financial or other material benefits, it is understood that the commissioning of one or more serious or especially grave crimes (for example, fraud committed by an organized group or in particularly large-scale), as a result of which a direct unlawful Appeal in favor of members of the criminal community (criminal organization) of cash, other property, including securities, etc.

Under the indirect receipt of financial or other material benefits is understood to be the commission of one or more serious or especially grave crimes, which are not directly encroaching on someone else's property, they still determine the receipt of funds and rights on property or other property benefits not only by community members (organizations) But also by other persons. "

The primary and ultimate goals of the criminal community (criminal organization) are interrelated from each other: receipt by members of the criminal community (criminal organization) or other persons directly or indirectly financially or other material benefits is possible only by committing a community (organization) of one or more grave or especially serious crimes.

The definition of signs of the criminal community (criminal organization) in criminal cases is often very difficult. Therefore, law enforcements in this matter are often used by the help of forensic psychological examination.

The judicial board of criminal cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation abolished the verdict of the Kemerovo Regional Court, who did not recognize the organized group of fraudsters with the criminal community (criminal organization) and did not give a proper assessment of a number of concrete circumstances of the criminal case, including the fact that the groups worked daily for five Monsters, the community had a single financial base (all the money reversed as a result of fraud. V., and he distributed them among the members of the Group), V. was the organizer and head of the community and under his beginning it was two groups of seven people, work and roles. Group members were identified, and this, in turn, talks about the structure of the organization (if there were displaced, only within the group).

The proceedings of the main institution did not provide the corresponding point to the solution of emotional examination, in accordance with which category is considered a small, unofficial, consisting of 2 subgroups (independent), concernedizing the favorite who stayed among themselves in relationships, comrade and similar relations, the category determines the organization , regulativity, organization, direct communication among its members, the presence of interpersonal interaction and mutual influence, uniform work mission, a set of values \u200b\u200band generally accepted measurements, interests, topics, internal rupping of functions and mass roles, focusing in place (stock exchange) and the conditional stability of the period . The limbs of this society used masking concepts.

2. Types of complicity. Responsibility of accomplices

crime Legal complicity

The organization, the management of illegal society (the criminal system), and equally assistance in this society (company) of the female according to themselves form an independent structure of the completed offense (Article 220 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Since the commission of a crime in the criminal community (criminal organization) is not envisaged as a separate qualifying feature in the articles of the special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, when committing a crime with a criminal community (criminal organization), its participants are responsible as a crime committed by an organized group, a group of persons by prior Corresponding or group of persons. This circumstance emphasized the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in the ruling "On judicial practice of consideration of criminal cases on the organization of the criminal community (criminal organization) or participation in it (her)": "When a participant in the criminal community (criminal organization) of a grave or particularly serious crime of his Actions are subject to qualifications for the combination of crimes provided for by part 2 of Article 210 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the corresponding part (clause) of the article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, taking into account the qualifying feature "Organized Group (For example, according to the article "A" of part 4 of Article 162 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation as a robbery performed by an organized group). If the composition of the perfect crime does not provide for a qualifying feature of its organized group, the aims of the person are subject to qualifications under Part 2 of Article 210 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the relevant part (clause) of the article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which contains a qualifying sign "by a group of persons by prior agreement , and if it is absent - on the basis of "group of persons . In this case, the regime is obliged to risk the problem of responsibility of the accomplices of the established category or the category of persons according to the progressive conspiracy due to the exercise of the offense, the structure of which does not take into account the qualifying indicator of the "created group" or "Categories of Persons according to the alleged conspiracy".

The provisions of the criminal law on the responsibility of responsibility of the offenses conclude for themselves a set of regulated by the legislator, and besides, have found a conclusion in the concept and practice of criminal credentials of special problems associated with the meaning of the responsibility of partners, the criminal lawful assessment of their importance in committing an offense.

These provisions are not exhausted by Article 34 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, but also include criminal law standards, providing for the features of the responsibility of organizers and participants in organized groups and criminal communities (criminal organizations) (Ch. 5, 6 Art.35 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), Excession of the Contractor (ST .36 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), the imputation of personal circumstances only to the Partner to which they relate (Part 2 of Article 67 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), as well as the features of the voluntary refusal of the organizer, instigator and the accomplicity (Part 4, 5 Art.31 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation ). The mercenary meaning for all these provisions has a general approach to the definition of the basis of criminal responsibility of the partners of the crime. On this account, two basic concepts were formed in the theory of domestic criminal law.

According to the first of them, known as an accessor theory of complicity (from Latin Accessorium - auxiliary, as without hands), difficult accomplices, i.e. The initiator, the instigator and accomplice, do not have an independent cause of criminal responsibility. The prerequisite for their responsibility is a criminal act, which is accomplished by the Contractor. Partners are assisted in the "alien" offense, the major culprit of which is the developer, for this reason, the unlawful work of the initiator, the instigator and the accomplice contains in any way independent, but only an auxiliary, subjective role according to the relationship to the criminal work of the Contractor.

In a more absolute embodiment, the key postulates of an additional concept of complicity in the current Russian criminal benefit are presented in the academic work of Prof.M.I. Kovalev and are subsequently: the database of one responsibility is absolutely all accomplices are the integrity of their operations, the basis of this integrity is the developer; In the absence of the artist, it is not capable of being complicity; The duty according to the laws on the reports is likely to be only the presence of the circumstance, the fact that the developer in spite of that would be zero to the offense of impact; the cause of criminal responsibility due to the company, provocation, the assistance is considered to be the structure of the offense performed by the Contractor; The register of the partner is determined by this note of the criminal law, according to what is characterized by the action of the Contractor.

A different concept of responsibility for complicity based on the theory of independent responsibility of partners, on the contrary, it comes from the fact that the basis of the criminal responsibility of each partner is independent. "Every accomplice, whatever his participation in a commitment to a perfect crime, is subject to criminal responsibility on the grounds that he himself, acting guilty, encroaches public relations to the criminal law., His personal activity is due to this publicly dangerous nature. And intentional participation in committing a crime acts as a personally, an accomplice, perfect act. Each subject, whether he acts one or together with others, committing a crime, thereby creating a basis for its criminal responsibility.

Later Professor V.S. Prokhorov, which is a consistent supporter of the theory of independent responsibility of partners, wrote: "Since with complicity with the distribution of roles between accomplices, each of them makes different actions, there is no reason to identify the compositions that correspond to their activities: these are different compositions of the crime, and each partner" has its own composition " .

The composition of the crime committed by the Contractor is provided for in the disposition of the article of the special part of the criminal law. The composition of the crime committed by the Organizer, instigator and the accomplice, consists of the signs specified as in the disposition of the article of the special part and in the article by the general part, providing for the act of each partner (Article 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The elimination of the criminal responsibility of the Contractor (for example, due to its voluntary refusal) does not exclude the responsibility of other partners of the crime. As a result, the foundations and boundaries of the responsibility of partners lie not in the act of the artist, but in the actions committed personally by each partner.

The current criminal legislation in the regulatory regulators are based on the compound of the essential provisions of both theories. On the one hand, the accessor nature of the complicity and the impossibility of the latter without the figure of the artist is recognized. On the other hand, an independent basis for the criminal responsibility of partners, determining the individual measure of the responsibility of each of them, depending on the nature and degree of actual participation in committing a crime. As a result of such combination, a fundamental approach to the basis of the responsibility of partners is being developed: responsibility for complicity in the crime is possible only if there is the basis of the responsibility of the Contractor, on the contrary, the elimination of the executive responsibility (for example, due to its voluntary failure, the fulfillment of the insignificant act) makes it impossible for the responsibility of others by the rules About complicity, which, nevertheless, does not exclude their independent responsibility for an individually perfect criminal act. Stoping the foundation of the criminal responsibility of partners, it should be borne in mind that it is not always legally the only one. Partners are actually the same crime may suffer criminal responsibility on various articles of the special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, for example, due to the non-achievement of one of them, which can be criminally liable for a certain crime. Let's say if two co-valves, one of which are 15 years old, and another - 16 years old, commit the murder of a law enforcement officer in order to prevent his legitimate public order protection activities and ensure public security, the actions of the first should qualify as murder with aggravating circumstances on . "B, w" Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and the actions of the second - as an encroachment on the life of a law enforcement officer under Article 317 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

In accordance with Part 1 of Article 34 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the responsibility of the partners of the crime is determined by the nature and degree of actual participation of each of them in committing a crime. The nature of participation in the commission of a crime is a criminal function provided for by the criminal law (role), which each of the partners involved in the crime. The nature of participation is the qualitative characteristics of the contribution contribution to a joint commitment, established by his criminal role of the artist, organizer, instigator or accomplicice. The nature of the participation of the person in the joint commitment dictates the basis of his criminal liability for this crime.

At the same time, in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation there are no special prescriptions regarding the founding of criminal responsibility of partners. All of them applies to the general rule that the basis of criminal liability is to accomplish the action containing all the signs of the composition of the crime provided for by the Criminal Code (Article 8 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

There are only the above-mentioned features in the description of the compositions of crimes committed by accomplices. The composition of the crime, as the basis of the criminal responsibility of the Contractor (Corollae), provides for the relevant article of the special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The composition of the organization, the composition of incitement and the composition of the application are formed by the unity of the prescriptions of special and general (Article 33) of the parts of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Based on this, rules for the qualifications of criminal acts of partners are regulated.

According to Part 2 of Article 34 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the performer has been qualified only under the article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code, which provides for the crime committed by him (by them), without reference to Article 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The fact that the crime is committed in complicity may be reflected in the qualification of acts of co-valves by specifying the qualifying sign of a group of persons, groups of persons under a preliminary conspiracy or an organized group, if there is a special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation or a reference to a similar circumstance, aggravating punishment (paragraph "in" Part 1 of Article 63 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

With a complex form, the qualifications of the performer has usually not reflects the fact that the crime is committed in complicity, therefore such qualifications are not different from the qualification of the subject who has committed the crime alone (for example, Part 1 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code - the murder) for this The reason for the science of criminal law is expressed that in such cases it is preferable to make a reference to Part 2 of Art. 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with the goal to emphasize that the crime is committed in complicity.

According to Part 3 of Article.34 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the organizer, the instigator and the accompaniment, qualifies under the article of the special part of the Criminal Code, which provides for the crime committed by them together with the Contractor, with reference to Part 3, 4 or 5 of Article.33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Such a link is necessary because the composition of the organization, incitement and complicity, as already noted, is composed of the signs indicated in the article of the special part of the Criminal Code, which provides for the act of the contractor, and in Article 33 of the Criminal Code describing the act of other partners. It should be added to those who should be added that, according to the priority of criminal law, when qualifications, it is necessary to refer not to in general at article 33 of the Criminal Code, but on its third, fourth or fifth, depending on the incriminated partner of the function in committing a crime (for example , Ch.5 Art.33 and Part 1 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - aiding murder; Part 4 of Article 33 and Part 1 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - incitement to the murder, part 3 of Article.33 and Part 1 Article 105 of the Criminal Code is the organization of murder).

When committing a crime in complicity, there are cases of cases where the same person performs several functions inherent in different types of accomplices (combining partner functions), for example, simultaneously performs the role of an instigator and accomplicice in a crime. The question arises - how to qualify this kind of criminal "partition"? One of these situations mentions the legislator. According to Part 3 of Article 34 of the Criminal Code, if the organizer, an incitement or accompanier took direct participation in the fulfillment of the objective part of the crime, they are recognized as shifters and their acts qualify only on the relevant article of the special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation without reference to Part 3, 4 or 5 Art.33 of the Criminal Code. Thus, the exclusion absorbs all other functions of partners. However, the fact that the factory along with the immediate commitment of the crime fulfilled its organizer, instigator or accomplice, will affect the evaluation of its actual participation in the crime and take into account when prescribing punishment.

On the assessment of situations where the person combines the functions of complex partners (the organizer, instigator and the accompaniment), the legislator was silent. Judicial practice in this issue is experiencing instability, in some cases regarding the deed only as an organization of the commission of a crime, in other cases qualifying each of the accomplices made separately with a simultaneous reference to Part 3, 4 and 5 of Article 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. For example, in one of the court decisions, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation pointed out: "Since the organizational role of the convicted person was to find a commitment to the murder, declining him to commit the crime, developing a plan for killing two persons, hiding corpses, traces of a crime and negotiating regarding the fee for a perfect crime, her Actions should be qualified under Part 3 of Article 33, paragraph. "A" Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and additional qualifications on CC.4 and 5 of article 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is not required.

In solving, in another case, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation took the opposite position, recognizing the correct qualifications of the defendants, which developed the plan for killing and robbery, found executors of crimes, told them the location of victims and storage of values, were given the time of the crime, ensured the delivery and unimpeded passage of performers To the scene of the crime and after the perfect crime, they were taken with abducted, as an organization, incitement and aiding murder and robbery assault (part 3, 4, 5 Art.33 and paragraph. "In" Part 4 of Article 162 RF, part 3, 4, 5 Art.33 and p. "A, F, Z" Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). If the accomplice combines the functions of the instigator and the accomplicity, they are usually deemed by them qualifying with a reference along with this by Part 4 and Part 5 of Article.33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The degree of participation in committing a crime is the measure of the activity of the partner when it fulfills its criminal function (role) in the joint committee of the crime. The degree of participation is the quantitative characteristics of the contribution contribution to a joint commitment, determined by the volume of criminal activity of the partner in the framework of the functional role carried out by them, the value of its saturation and effectiveness to achieve a finite criminal result. The more actual participation in committing a crime may indicate such circumstances as: more and importance for the occurrence of socially dangerous consequences of criminal actions made by one of the co-valves (for example, a greater degree of participation in the murder is characterized by a co-owner who caused knife blows to the victim, rather than the co-player, who held the victim at this time. Combining the enforcement of the crime of the functions of the organizer, an incitement or accomplicity; fulfilling the partner of the role of the initiator of the crime (persons who put forward the idea of \u200b\u200bcommitting a crime and actively participating in its implementation). The level of person's participation in the joint committee of the crime affects the choice of measures ( Individualization) of his criminal liability for this crime. At the same time, a particularly initiative role in committing a crime is recognized as a permitting a sense of punishment (paragraph "G" Part 1 of Article 63 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

Complicity in a crime with a special subject. In accordance with Part 4 of Article 34 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, a person who is not subject to the crime specifically specified in the relevant article of the special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which participated in the commission of the crime provided for by this article shall be criminally liable for this crime as its organizer, an instigger or accomplice. We are talking about situations when in a crime, the performer who can only be a special subject, along with the latter, the persons who are not posted by signs of a special subject, but only correspond to the quality of the general subject of crime (for example, a regular citizen organizes a service life official) . Since to commit a crime in complicity, it is enough that the persons participating in it have signs of a common crime subject, complicity in crimes with a special subject is not excluded. However, accomplices that do not have signs of a special subject of the relevant crime may suffer criminal responsibility for him only as the organizer, instigator or accomplicice. The performers of this crime cannot be.

This rule applies, including those cases when a person who does not have signs of a special subject naturally takes part in committing a crime with a special subject, in part or even fully fulfilling the objective side of this crime. Suppose a civilian who is not a subject of military crime, together with the servicemen, applies violence to his boss during the fulfillment of the last responsibilities of the military service (Article 334 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Or, let's say, an ordinary citizen at the direction of an official makes the forge of the official document instead (Article 262 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Because persons do not have signs of a special subject of the relevant crime, they cannot be recognized by performers (co-valves) of this crime, even though their role has actually coordinated to the full or partial execution of the objective side of the crime. Criminal liability of such persons should be perfected by a crime with a special subject in the form of providing funds or tools for committing a crime. A special entity in all cases is criminalized as a criminal executive, including mediocre.

Complicity in an unfinished crime. In accordance with Part 5 of Article.34 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the event of disadvantaged by the executor of the crime to the end of the circumstances independent of it, the remaining partners carry criminal liability for preparing for a crime or an attempt on a crime. This rule, flowing from the accessor nature of complicity, reflects the fact that under the Understanding by the executor of the crime to the end of the reasons independent of him, this circumstance is taken into account when determining the founding of criminal responsibility of other partners. If the criminal activity of the executive of the crime was interrupted on the circumstances independent of him during the preparation stage, the rest of the partners should also be criminal responsibility for complicity in preparing for a crime. If the performer did not bring the crime to the end at the age stage, then the rest of the partners will be responsible for the complicity in the attempt on the crime.

The criminal responsibility of the organizer, instigator and the accomplice with the incomplete crime of the Contractor will emphasize the corresponding article of the special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with a simultaneous reference as at Article 33 and the relevant part of Article 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. For example, when preparing a performer for the murder, the organizer of this crime will be responsible for Parts 3 of Article 33, Part 1 of Article 30 and Part 1 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code (organization of preparation for the murder). In the same way, the responsibility will be held when performing an attempted attack on a crime with the difference only, instead of Part 1 of Article 30 of the Criminal Code, it is necessary to refer to Part of this article. The procedure for recording the qualification formula (first referral to Article 33, and then at Article 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), which is not always followed in judicial practice, is of fundamental importance, since it reflects the fact that there was exactly the complicity in the incomplete crime of the performer, as This follows from the first sentence of Ch.5 Art.34 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and not to prepare for complicity or attempted complicity, which is characteristic of another circumstance failed complicity.

Pottedikov, Moiseyev, Doronin and Zaicin agreed to commit a robbery attack on the apartment Stekina, who, engaged in selling currency, constantly had home large amounts of money. On October 31, 2010, for the developed plan, the crime of Potovikov pointed out the apartment of Stekina and remained downstairs at the entrance to monitor the situation. Doronin called the apartment and in order to penetrate it asked Stepkin to exchange dollars of the United States. The latter, opening the locks, saw in the door eye that one of the criminals puts on a mask, in connection with which the door did not open with, but began to shout that he would call the police. Frightened, accomplices ran away. The Judicial Board of Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the protest of the First Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation qualified the actions of Pootkova under Part 5 of Article 33, Part 3 of Article 30, PP. "A", "B", "G" Part 2 of Article 162 of the Criminal Code.

In another criminal case, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation otherwise qualified tropine's actions as an organizer of an attempt to commit a group of persons by a preliminary conspiracy, with illegal penetration into the dwelling - under Part 3 of Article 30, Part 3 of Article 33, PP. "A", "in" Part 2 of Article 161 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Failed complicity. In accordance with Part 5 of Article 34 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for the preparation for the crime, the person who, for independent circumstances, could not be incorrecting other persons to commit the crime. This criminal law is devoted to the evaluation of the circumstance, which in the theory of criminal law is often referred to as failed complicity. In the literal sense of the word, the legislator is talking about a failed incitement, in which the activity of the incitement is in vain, as the performer does not commit the desired crime. Unfortunately, nothing is said about the non-successful organization of a crime and failed complicity, which may also be unsuccessful due to the fact that the performer ignores the scenario of the crime developed by the Organizer, or does not use the help of the help to give him an accomplice. In the theory and practice of criminal law, it is decided to believe that criminal liability for the failed organization of the crime and failed perpetrators of the crime comes in the same rule as for failed incitement, i.e. For preparing for a crime.

Cases of failed complicity are fundamentally different from complicity in an unfinished crime. In accordance with the incomplete crime, the activities of accomplices are causally and perpetuated with the criminal activity of the Contractor, who has failed to bring the crime to the end. With a failed complicity, either the figure of the executive crime as the main partner is not at all (the alleged performer did not commit a crime or began his commitment, but subsequently refused to bring it to the end), or the criminal activity of the organizer, instigator and the accompaniment on the circumstances independent of them Located in a causal connection with the crime committed by the Contractor (the Contractor did not commit a crime to which the instigator was inclined, or did not take advantage of the help of the organizer or accomplice and committed a crime without their participation). Based on the accessor nature of the complicity, the latter cannot take place if there is no foundation of the criminal responsibility of the executor of the crime. Without a perpetrator of a crime there is no complicity. Equally, there is no complicity, if there is no causal relationship between the act of the partner and the act of the executive of the crime. As you know, such a connection plays a decisive role in determining the concept of complicity, forming one of his objective signs - unite the participation of persons in a crime.

Thus, failed complicity, strictly speaking, is not a complicity in the crime. Therefore, the criminal liability of persons who are conventionally referred to as farewell accomplishments comes not for the organization, incitement or aiding in preparing for a crime, and for the usual preparation for this crime, in which these persons intended to participate as an organizer, instigator or accomplice. It is not by chance that in the last sentence of Part 5 of Article 34 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the legislator avoids the term "instigator" and leads a speech "the person who does not have any circumstances dependent on him fail to incline others to commit the crime."

In judicial practice, there are decisions disagreeable with the position of the legislator and the above provisions of theory, and based on the mixture of criminal law assessment of complicity in an unfinished crime and failed complicity. In February 2012, to P. appealed to B. with a request to help commit a killing of a neighbor, since there was extremely hostile relations between them. Realizing that B. and her husband K. have serious intentions, he reported this to the police. At the request of law enforcement officers P. met with B. and her husband K., and B. explained that her husband is informed, he knows about the nature of their meeting, and they both want their neighbor to be killed until May 1, 2012 . Acting on the instructions of the police officers, P. agreed to help in organizing the murder, saying B. that she will call S., with whom these questions can be solved.

S., who was a police officer acting under the cover, acted as a "performer" of crimes. He phoned with B. and agreed to meet. They met in a cafe, where B. requested faster to solve the issue of killing a neighbor, hide the corpse further from home so as not to suspect her husband's murder. He reported that she had money for murder in the amount of 100 thousand rubles, but she would give them to the Contractor only if there was evidence of the murder, and gave a deposit of 5 thousand rubles. On May 15, 2012, by conclusion in advance and reporting the execution of the order, Sh. Met with B., who, having made sure that it was the woman in the photographs, the murder of which she ordered, was handed over. Envelope with money.

According to the sentence of the Arkhangelsk Regional Court of November 27, 2012. and B. are found guilty of organizing preparation for the kill on hiring, which was not brought to the end of the circumstances independent of their will and convicted under Part 3 of Article 33, Part 1 of Article. 30, paragraph "Z" Part 2 Article 105 of the Criminal Code. Operational search activities, which were conducted against convicts with the participation of P. and Sh., Were recognized as legitimate and reasonable. From the above example, it can be seen that P. and S. made legitimate actions during operational-search activities, which were conducted within the framework of the Federal Law "On Operational Festival Activities". It means that P. and Sh. Were not performers of making a murder who did not bring the crime to the end of the circumstances independent of them. And this, in turn, excludes the assessment of the RED-C. and B. according to the rule of complicity in an unfinished crime, i.e. as an organization of preparing for the murder. In fact, convicts, as failed partners, should be responsible for the usual preparation for the kill for hiring without reference to Part 3 of Article 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

On the confusion of the rules of the criminal law assessment of complicity in an unfinished crime and failed complicity, the indication of the Supreme Court of Russia on the qualifications of the mediator's actions in sales or in the acquisition of narcotic drugs, when an operational-search event was held against it. As stated in the review of judicial practice in criminal cases of crimes related to the illicit trafficking of narcotic drugs, psychotropic, potent and poisonous substances, (approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on June 27, 2012) ", when the mediator is brought to criminal responsibility on the results of operational-search results Events, verification purchases, then the actions of the mediator cannot be qualified as an overclusive crime and are subject to qualifications as aiding in attempting to purchase narcotic drugs (Ch. 5 Art.33, Part 3 of Article 30 and the corresponding part of Article 228 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), Since the narcotic agent is withdrawn from illegal turnover. "

An unanswered question is - who is the performer attempted for the acquisition of narcotic drugs, if the intended, according to the Intermediator, the Posternaya, the acquirer of drugs in reality is not a criminal, because Participates in a legitimate operational investigation event? It must be said that if in the question of the qualifications of the failed complicity to consistently adhere to the theory of independent responsibility of accomplices, then those who were disassembed by failed accomplices should be regarded as an attempt on complicity in a crime, i.e. Attemption to the organization, an attempt on incitement or an attempted persecution of the crime, which would require when qualifying simultaneous references to Part 3 of Article 30 and Part 3, 4 or 5 Article.33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Such an approach is known in the theory of criminal law and is found in judicial practice. However, the current Russian criminal law does not perceive this logic.

Conclusion

In today's circumstances, there will be a rise in crimes in complicity: group, organized forms of criminal behavior, criminal law (Art. 32 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) gives the concept of complicity in a crime. Consistently with the Criminal Code, the effective participation of two or more persons in the commission of an intentional crime is recognized as a crime.

This concept includes the following signs: first, complicity is likely in an intentional crime. The intent suggests the intention of committing a crime and the guilty person takes volitional efforts to make it. With a careless crime, an attacker has no intention to commit a crime and then does not prepare and does not have partners; Secondly, two or more persons participate in the crime, that is, it has a group (or organized character). At the same time, all accomplices must have signs of a crime subject: physical, imputed persons who have reached the age from which criminal liability comes; Thirdly, group activities (complicity) also has such a sign as united, participation together, the orientation for a general criminal result, as well as the presence of a causal relationship between actions (inaction) of each partner and cumulative criminal consequences (the threat of such consequences). The form and types of complicity are allowed to individualize criminal liability depending on the role and degree of public danger of each partner. In most cases, for the commission of a crime in a group, in the composition of an organized group or criminal community, the level of public danger of criminal attempt increases, as if "increasing" the criminal effect of such activities as a result of which the law provides for more strict criminal liability.

Definition and consolidation of the role of each partner allows you to regularly qualify criminal acts and individualize their responsibility. The nature and level of public danger of a crime (including committed in complicity) in the general form find the display in the disposition and sanctions of the articles of the special part of the Criminal Code. Nevertheless, in each individual case of a crime (including in complicity), the nature and degree of public danger are manifested in a variety, depending on the presence or absence of those or other objective and subjective circumstances accompanying it. Therefore, it is very important when prescribing punishment within the limits provided by law, believing with all the circumstances of each individual case, to determine the nature and degree of danger of the crime. Special provisions taken into account when appointing punishment of crime accomplices relate to, on the one hand, individual types of complicity, and on the other, the nature and degree of person's participation in the crime produced.

As for the articles, where a group of persons acts as a qualifying circumstance, in cases of committing crimes due to their crimes, a group of pre-negotiating persons or an organized group, each of their participants is qualified according to the specified articles of the Criminal Code. At the same time, the commission, for example, rape by a group of pre-negotiating persons or organized by a group, beyond whether it should be taken into account when prescribing punishment as increasing the responsibility of the circumstances in the sense of Art. 63 CC. Likewise, it should be the case and in cases of committing a crime by an organized group that falls under the article by a special part of the Criminal Code, where only a group of pre-agricultural persons is provided as the main or qualifying feature, that is, the deed must be qualified under this article of the law, and the commission of a crime organized by the Group It must be over the way being taken into account as an aggravating circumstance (Art. 63 of the Criminal Code). When prescribing punishment, the nature and level of actual participation of each partner in committing a crime, the importance of this participation to achieve the goal of a crime, its influence on the nature and size of causing or possible harm (Article 67 of the Criminal Code) is also taken into account.

List of sources used

1.Constitution of the Russian Federation (with amended by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of July 25, 2003 No. 841) // Russian newspaper. 1993. December 25

.Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 27, 2002 №29 "On judicial practice on theft, robbery and scattering", paragraph 25.// Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. - 2003. - №2.

.Gurov A.I. The criminogenic situation in Russia at the turn of the XXI century. - M., 2010.

.Course of criminal law. Volume 3. Special part. / Ed. G.N. Borzenkova, V.S. Comacorov. - M.: Lawyer, 2012.

.Eliseev S.A. Crimes against ownership of the criminal law of Russia. - Tomsk, 2013