Поняття істотної шкоди за кримінальним правом України: автореферат

Abstract

Дисертація є комплексним дослідженням поняття істотної шкоди за кримінальним правом України. Узагальнено історичний та зарубіжний досвід регламентації кримінальної відповідальності за злочини, ознакою складів яких є істотна шкода. Здійснено аналіз істотної шкоди як наскрізної ознаки, передбаченої Кримінальним кодексом України, розглянуто її зміст та обсяг, а також вивчено співвідношення поняття «істотна шкода» зі суміжними кримінально-правовими поняттями. Доведено недоцільність застосування у КК України термінів «значна майнова шкода», «майнова шкода у великих розмірах», «майнова шкода в особливо великих розмірах», оскільки ці поняття збігаються за змістом зі спорідненими поняттями, які не мають самостійного змістового навантаження, а саме: «значна матеріальна шкода», «велика матеріальна шкода», «матеріальна шкода в особливо великому розмірі». Встановлено помилки, які допускають правозастосовні органи під час кримінально-правової кваліфікації злочинів, ознакою складів яких є істотна шкода, а також окреслено недоліки системи покарань за аналізовані посягання.The dissertation comprises a comprehensive research of the notion “substantial harm” under Criminal Law of Ukraine. The historical and foreign experience in the regulation of criminal liability for offences with substantial harm being their essential element is summarized. The substantial harm as a constant element envisaged by the Criminal Code of Ukraine is analyzed. The research of the topic covered all the articles of Criminal Code of Ukraine, which contain the direct reference to the notion “substantial harm” being one of the many constant criminal law notions as well as one of the objective aspects of the offence. The substantial harm as a sign of insignificance of the act stipulated by Article 11 of the General Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine has been investigated in the research. It has been stated that the substantial harm is considered to be the least possible harm inflicted to one object and which may entail criminal responsibility. The essence of the notion “substantial harm” is clarified on the basis of which its essential elements are identified. These include: such harm is a direct, real harm; it can have a property character and expressed in negative consequences of physical, moral or other non-property character; the harm is substantial at a certain size, which is unequal in relation to individual components of the crime; it indicates such changes in the object, which confirm the public danger of the attack, justify criminalization and lack of insignificance. In the course of the analysis of the notion of substantial harm, the phenomena of substantial pecuniary harm (property damage) and substantial non-pecuniary harm (non-property damage) are studied. It is noted that substantial pecuniary harm covers real positive damage (consisting in inflicting of direct material damage) and damage that has a personal (physical) character (death, bodily harm, etc.). The substantial non-pecuniary harm concerns the internal world of the victim and impinges upon the intangible benefits and. so on. The consequences of intangible nature covered by the term "substantial harm", include the consequences of the moral, social, organizational, political, environmental and other harm. The issue of the correlation between the notion of the substantial harm and the related terms is researched, namely “harm to health”, “substantial harm to health”, “significant harm”, “significant property damage”, “significant pecuniary harm”, “harsh consequences”. It is stated that the extent of damage is the same in certain cases. Therefore, it is suggested to avoid using terms “significant property damage”, “property damage in high amount”, “property damage in a particularly high amount” in the Criminal Code of Ukraine, as far as these terms overlap with their related notions without a self-standing meaning, namely “significant pecuniary harm”, “great pecuniary harm”, “pecuniary harm in a particularly high amount”. The mistakes made by the law enforcement authorities in characterizing the offences with substantial harm being their essential element are identified. In particular, it refers to the cases with different criminal and legal assessment of the same socially dangerous acts having the same consequences; rejection of the presence of the component elements of a crime in the acts where they are present; establishment of a crime in the actions, where, in fact, there are no components of the crime or wrong choice of the norm of the Criminal Code of Ukraine for the qualification of a crime. The correlations existing between the offences with substantial harm being their common essential element are outlined, which, therefore, influences the choice of rules of the legal classification of offences. It has been pointed out that the encroachments analyzed may be in the competition of general and special norms, parts and the whole (negligent attitude to military service), and be adjacent, as well. The analysis of penalty for offences with substantial harm being their essential element is carried out. The seriousness of the offences with substantial harm being their essential element is determined, and types and forms of imposed punishment are analyzed.