Menu: Home :: go to Journal :: switch to Russian :: switch to English
You are here: all Journals and Issues→ Journal→ Issue→ Article

Criminal legislation of foreign countries on fraudulent encroachments on property and legitimate interests of credit institutions

Annotation

We consider legislative problems of regulating liability for fraud in the field of lending. We conduct a comparative analysis of the provisions of the criminal legislation of foreign countries for credit fraud that infringes on the property and legitimate interests of credit institutions. We note that German criminal law provides for liability for crimes of fraud and abuse of confidence for criminal purposes. A feature of the German language is in this case the interpretation of the concept of “credit fraud” as “fraud”, the most correct in this case, the name of fraud in the field of credit will be as “credit fraud”. We analyze the controversial nature of the object of this crime within the framework of German criminal law and the concept of credit is given, which made it possible to conclude that the rule that ensures combating fraud in the credit sector is limited in its application exclusively to the sphere of lending. Based on the analysis of the signs of the objective side of fraudulent encroachments in the field of lending, it was concluded that the composition of credit fraud is formal. Investigative practice shows that when establishing guilt, certain difficulties arise in practice. The norm on credit fraud is characterized in criminal law as saturated with vague, evaluative signs, for example, the concept of “economy or enterprise”, “incorrectness” of documents and written information, their “significance” for making a decision on a loan. For a comparative analysis, the subject of the study was also taken the criminal law on credit fraud of the CIS member states. In the course of the analysis of the provisions of the criminal legislation of the CIS member states, it was concluded that there is no unambiguity in the formulation of the disposition of the rules on credit fraud among the member countries. Thus, the criminal legislation in matters of criminalization of fraud in the field of lending in Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan tends more to the Russian one, while in Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, a tendency has been revealed that the norms are close to the criminal legislation of Germany. A study of the English and Australian court practice in criminal cases in the field of lending allows us to conclude that the temporary borrowing of credit funds qualifies as gratuitous fraudulent encroachment in the credit sector. US criminal law provides for liability for credit fraud as part of the general fraud rule.

Keywords

foreign law credit fraud, German criminal law, credit fraud, fraud, credit institutions, US criminal law, general fraud regulation, criminal abuse of trust, property

Full-text in one file

Download

DOI

10.20310/2587-9340-2021-5-20-779-791

UDC

349

Pages

779-791

References

1. Klepitskiy I. Sobstvennost’ i imushchestvo v ugolovnom prave [Property and property in criminal law]. Gosudarstvo i pravo – State and Law, 1997, no. 5, pp. 74-83. (In Russian). 2. Klepitskiy I.A. Sistema khozyaystvennykh prestupleniy [The System of Economic Crimes]. Moscow, Statut Publ., 2005, 572 p. (In Russian). 3. Osokin R.B., Kokorev V.G. K voprosu o dokazyvanii prestupleniy protiv sobstvennosti, sovershennykh s prichineniyem znachitel’nogo ushcherba: problemy i puti ikh resheniya [On the issue of proving crimes against property committed with causing significant damage: problems and ways to solve them]. Prestupleniya protiv pravosudiya, sovershayemyye na dosudebnykh stadiyakh ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva [Crimes Against Justice Committed at the Pre-Trial Stages of Criminal Proceedings]. Moscow, Jurisprudence Publishing House, Moscow Universty of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation named after V.Y. Kikot Publ., 2020, pp. 88-90. (In Russian). 4. Osokin R.B., Nemtinov D.V. K voprosu priznakov prestupleniy v sfere ekonomicheskoy deyatel’nosti, sovershayemykh putem obmana i (ili) zloupotrebelniya doveriyem [On the issue of signs of crimes in the sphere of economic activity committed by deception and (or) abuse of trust]. Obshchestvo i pravo – Society and Law, 2016, no. 2 (56), pp. 28-32. (In Russian). 5. Osokin R.B. Ob intellektual’no-psikhologicheskikh kachestvakh sub”yekta moshennicheskikh posyagatel’stv [About intellectually and psychological qualities of the subject of phishing attacks]. Mezhdunarodnyy zhurnal psikhologii i pedagogiki v sluzhebnoy deyatel’nosti – International Journal of Psychology and Pedagogy in Office Activity, 2017, no. 3, pp. 49-50. (In Russian). 6. Avdiyskiy V.I., Bezdenezhnykh V.M., Dadalko V.A. et al. Edinyye Gosudarstvennyye standarty po obespecheniyu ekonomicheskoy bezopasnosti khozyaystvuyushchikh sub”yektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Unified State Standards for Ensuring Economic Security of Business Entities of the Russian Federation]. St. Petersburg, Sovetnik Publ., 2014, 160 p. (In Russian). 7. Truntsevskiy Y.V., Karpovich O.G. Teoriya i sovremennyye praktiki komplayensa. Modeli protivodeystviya kriminal’nym ugrozam [Theory and Modern Practices of Compliance. Criminal Threat Countermeasures]. Moscow, UNITY-DANA: State and Law, 2016, 407 p. (In Russian). 8. Solovyev O.G., Gribov A.S. Opyt zakonodatel’noy reglamentatsii otvetstvennosti za ekonomicheskiye prestupleniya v UK Tekhasa (SShA) [Experience of legislative regulation of liability for economic crimes in the Criminal Code of Texas (USA)]. Rossiyskiy sledovatel’ – Russian Investigator, 2008, no. 24, pp. 36-38. (In Russian). 9. Elliot C., Quinn F. Chapter № 9. Fraudulent property offences. Criminal Law. Third Edition. 2000, pp. 158-177. 10. Veron M. Droit penal special. Paris, 1994, 301 p. (In French). 11. Blank T. Strafrecht. Besonderer Teil, II/2. Vermogensdelikte. Köln, 2001, 257 S. (In German). 12. Wabnitz H.-B., Janovsky T. (eds.). Handbuch des Wirtschafts- und Steuerstrafrechts. München, 2000, 175 S. (In German). 13. Bogush G.I., Trikoz E.N. (eds.). Mezhdunarodnoye ugolovnoye pravosudiye. Sovremennyye problemy [International Criminal Justice. Contemporary Problems]. Moscow, 2009, 747 p. (In Russian). 14. Rasskazov L.P. Otvetstvennost’ za transnatsional’nyye prestupleniya [Accountability for Transnational Crimes]. Krasnodar, Krasnodar Law Institute Publ., 2000, 119 p. (In Russian). 15. Truntsevskiy Y.V. Ponyatiye transnatsional’nogo prestupleniya [Concept of transnational crimes]. Mezhdunarodnoye ugolovnoye pravo i mezhdunarodnaya yustitsiya – International Criminal Law and International Justice, 2014, no. 3, pp. 9-12. (In Russian). 16. Osokin R.B. Ugolovno-pravovaya kharakteristika sposobov soversheniya moshennichestva: dis. … kand. yurid. nauk [Criminal and Legal Characteristics of the Ways of Committing Fraud. Cand. jurid. sci. diss.]. Moscow, 2004, 184 p. (In Russian). 17. Klepitskiy I.A. Kreditnyy obman v sravnitel’no-pravovom aspekte [Credit fraud in a comparative legal aspect]. Zakonodatel’stvo – Legislation, 2003, no. 1, pp. 55-63. (In Russian).

Received

2021-09-22

Section of issue

Substantive law

Для корректной работы сайта используйте один из современных браузеров. Например, Firefox 55, Chrome 60 или более новые.