Ar veika, numatyta Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamojo kodekso 223 straipsnyje (aplaidus buhalterinės apskaitos tvarkymas), priskirtina prie tyčinių nusikalstamų veikų?
Lasevičius, Andrius |
Dabartiniame Lietuvos Respublikos Baudžiamojo kodekso 223 straipsnio pavadinime nurodytas „aplaidumas“, kuris praktikoje sukelia Baudžiamojo kodekso 223 straipsnį taikantiems subjektams dvejonių, kadangi straipsnyje nenurodyta, kokia nusikalstamos veikos forma gali būti pažeidžiamas Baudžiamojo kodekso 223 straipsnis. Dėl Baudžiamojo kodekso 223 straipsnio neišsamios ir neišbaigtos nusikalstamos veikos sudėties formuluotės, teismų praktikoje tenka atkreipti dėmesį į teismų priimtus sprendimus, kuriuose pastebima Baudžiamojo kodekso 223 straipsnio kaltės kvalifikacijos esminių klaidų ir priimtų prieštaringų sprendimų sugretintose bylose esant panašioms faktinėms aplinkybėms. Atsižvelgiant į įstatymo leidėjo suformuluotą Baudžiamojo kodekso 223 straipsnį yra privalu apžvelgti straipsnio sampratą, apžvelgti bei išanalizuoti straipsnio sudėties požymius, kurie turi lemiamą reikšmę asmens baudžiamosios atsakomybės skyrimui. Aptarti dėl kokių galimų priežasčių teismai netinkamai kvalifikuoja aplaidaus buhalterinės apskaitos straipsnio sudėties požymius. Taip pat reikšmingas kriterijus yra apžvelgti ir nustatyti, kaip galimai asmuo suvokė savo vykdomą nusikalstamą veiką, kuri pažeidė Baudžiamojo kodekso 223 straipsnį. Pristatyti ir apžvelgti Lietuvos Aukščiausiojo Teismo aktualijas, Baudžiamojo kodekso 223 straipsnio taikymo ir sudėties atžvilgiu. Pabrėžti ar tinkamai teismai vertina pagrindinius aplaidaus buhalterinės apskaitos tvarkymo taikymo aspektus, kuriuos nustatė Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas. Apžvelgti ar teismai vieningai formuoją vieningą teismų praktiką taikant Baudžiamojo kodekso 223 straipsnį. Dėl minėtų priežasčių pagrindinė užduotis yra įvertinti ar veika nustatyta Baudžiamojo kodekso 223 straipsnyje yra priskirtina prie tyčinių nusikalstamų veikų. Dėl šių priežasčių visumos kilo problema ar veika, numatyta Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamojo kodekso 223 straipsnyje (aplaidus buhalterinės apskaitos tvarkymas), priskirtina prie tyčinių nusikalstamų veikų? Todėl analizuojant minėtą problemą darbe siekiamas tikslas yra atskleisti Baudžiamojo kodekso 223 straipsnio sudėties požymius ir nustatyti ar minėtasis straipsnis yra priskirtinas prie tyčinių nusikalstamų veikų.
The disposal part of the current Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania Article 223 specifies the “negligence” as the constituent element of a criminal act. However, the interpretation of the phrase “negligence” is not provided neither in the Accounting Law, nor in the Criminal Code. The entities who apply Article 223 of the Criminal Code in their practice possibly do not duly understand the feature of a personal “negligence” provided for in the Article. In practice the phrase “negligence” causes hesitation for entities who apply Article 223 of the Criminal Code, because the same Article does not specify in what form of the offense Article 223 of the Criminal Code may be breached. Given the legislature composed of the Criminal Code, Article 223 is required to review the article concept. Therefore, it is important to review and analyze the article objective and subjective constituent elements, which collectively is crucial to personal criminal liability of the appointment. It is important to review and persons act objectively and rationally understand the composition of breaking the law. It presumed that a person intentionally fulfilled offense Criminal Code Article 223 to realize the objective features, because they indicate that article disposal. Personal intent, can be direct or indirect, the crucial difference is a personal psychic connection with criminal law consequences of the rise of the company. In order to determine the person is exposed to direct intent is required to prove a person's mental relationship with causality and will face serious consequences. Indirect personal intent to describe a person of the offense and the perception that there may be dangerous effects, even though their party and did not want to, but deliberately allowed them to rise. Personal dangerous consequences reluctance explained that a person does not have interest in that you have dangerous consequences, but that does not take them to avoid any objective, rational action. The person carrying out a criminal act, to act intentionally defined when a person perceives danger of the activity and provides pre-emptively defined consequences. Negligent bookkeeping case, required to evaluate the effects encountered by the legislature under Article consequences for the level and assessment of a person's mental link with the consequences originating due incriminate the perpetrator of the criminal law. It is necessary to negligent bookkeeping case assessment and careless form of guilt. Negligence is a personal act or omission, which can lead to dangerous consequences, but careless person expects the effects to be avoided or a person does not adverse climatic effects anticipated effects ever had and was able to provide. Negligence is divided into two forms of t. y. recklessly and criminal negligence: Recklessly persons act gets its intelligent (hazardous effects of the induction of anticipation) and Valine (lightly faith to avoid the consequences) moments. In a criminal confidence in his person to act solely in the abstract, careless, hasty perception of the ability to cause the consequences of any person in an objective and rational assessment of the circumstances, he should consider that there is no reason to avoid the dangerous effects of adverse climatic effects anticipated. Personal offense onset of negligence, must establish a causal link between a person, as a special entity lack of care and consequential effects, because such behavior person expresses its opposition to the proper performance of duties, for which there is a danger the law protected values. An important criterion for deciding on personal responsibility is a causal link between the offense and the ramifications of setting, which is an objective basis of liability, however, are required and subjective guilt half. Article 223 of the Criminal Code can be seen in the necessary causal connection, since it is characterized by appropriate natural person internal events is that a person is exposed in the fact that one or another person under the conditions act mostly or very likely to cause serious consequences under the law. A review of criminal law theory is claimed to be the correct classification of the offense is particularly important to identify the constituent elements of the offense, so we can say that the Criminal Code, Article 223 is no exception. Given that the respect for the constituent elements are not unified criminal law penalists opinion. Some penalists argue that a criminal offense can be achieved exclusively through negligence, while the other part says that a criminal act can be carried out and intentionally. In order to determine a person's guilt form, it is important to assess the person's inner (mental) side, which forms a bond with the perception of the offense, its justification and personal action forwarding and controlling. Individual acts perception gets guilt, ongoing work correctly motive and dangerous consequences. This is especially important when dealing with the issue of personal responsibility for the execution of a committed an offense. Since the fault is the main character of the offense, and criminal law doctrine accepted that the fault is the person committed the offense psychic relationship with the main objective of criminal activities. Given that a person, as a special entity, aware of their criminal activities, which violated the Criminal Code, Article 223, it may be assumed that a person could be influenced by selfish motives (e. g .. unpaid part of the amount of taxes to the State Tax Inspectorate, etc.) and realize the required accounting management may consciously (intentionally) negligent handling their accounts. In order to clarify the Criminal Code, Article 223 of the constituent elements it is important to review and analyze the Lithuanian Supreme Court issues, the Criminal Code and Article 223 of the application in respect of the composition. The assessment of Lithuanian Supreme Court, to emphasize the proper courts of the main lax bookkeeping, and aspects of the application. In this case, it must review the case law and the courts unanimously follow uniform case law, the application of Article 223 of the Criminal Code. Because of the Criminal Code, Article 223, incomplete and not a complete composition of the offense wording of the case-law has to pay attention to court rulings which display the Criminal Code, Article 223, the fault of qualification of fundamental errors and adopt a hostile decision, under similar facts collated matters. The consequence of these circumstances, Court decision threatens the principle of justice. Since one of the basic principles of justice are unified judicial practices. Therefore, the courts outside the single practice principle, there may be distrust of justice, as both the public and the same person to whom the provisions of the Criminal Code, Article 223, can also be perceived as that provided for in Article sanctions may be too soft or too strict assessment of the circumstances. For these reasons, a whole there was a problem or offense, provided the Lithuanian Criminal Code Article 223 (negligent bookkeeping) attributable to intentional criminal acts. Therefore, the analysis of the problem, the work aim being to reveal the Criminal Code, Article 223 of the constituent elements and to determine whether the said Article is attributable to intentional criminal acts.